UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 
AT  LOS  ANGELES 


GIFT  OF   CAPT.   AND    MRS. 
PAUL  MCBRIDE  PERIGORD 


UNIVERSITY  of  CALIFORNIA 

AT 

LOS  ANGELES 


v> 


Society  in  Rome  unJer  the  Caesars.  By  W. 
R.  Inge.  (Murray.)  A  book  in  which  the 
somewhat  bulky  German  Darstellungen  of 
Friedlander  should  be  popularised  for  English 
readers  ought  to  prove  widely  acceptable.  It 
might  be  to  this  generation  of  schoolboys  what 
Becker's  Oallus  was  to  their  predecessors.  It 
would  serve  to  put  heart  and  life  into  their 
reading,  to  connect  their  fragments  of  informa- 
tion, and  make  them  realise  that  the  Romans 
were  a  lining  people.  Something  of  the  kind 
must  be  studied  to  supply  the  local  colouring  for 
the  Latin  authors.  It  should  not  be  too  long ; 
and  a  well-contrived  summary  of  Friedlander 
would  be  more  attractive,  and,  therefore,  more 
useful,  than  a  dictionary  of  antiquities,  or  even 
a  large  work  such  as  that  of  Guhl  and  Koner. 
Unfortunately  Mr.  Inge,  though  he  has  turned 
the  Darstellungen  to  good  account,  seems  to 
have  written  and  printed  his  essay  in  too  great 
a  hurry.  There  are  more  misprints  than  there 
should  be,  and  many  other  slips.  P.  14 
confuses  an  augur  with  a  haruspex  in  quoting 
Cato's  jest,  although  Cicero,  our  authority  for 
the  story,  telis  it  expressly  of  har  us  pices  (De 
Div.  2.24.)  The  child  whom  Quintiilian 
mentions  as  punished  for  cruelty  to  birds  was 
punished  at  Athens,  not  at  Rome ;  and  his  fate 
throws  no  light  on  the  character  of  the  Roman 
people.  Horace  was  not  a  Roman  knight,  as 
p.  139  implies.  Trimalchio  in  Petronius  (c.  71) 
is  not  directing  that  no  philosopher  is  to 
approach  him  in  his  last  illness,  but  is  boasting 
that  he  never  attended  any  philosopher's  lectures 
If  Mr.  Inge  will  work  over  his  essay,  correct 
the  oversights,  and  let  his  work  grow  naturally 
in,  successive  editions,  we  shall  be  able  to 
repommend  it  as  an  excellent  prize  or  volume 
for  the  school  library. 


mr 


SOCIETY  IN    ROME 


UNDER 


THE   CiESARS. 


By    WILLIAM    RALPH    INGE,   M.A., 

Fellow  of  King's  College,  Cambridge,  and 
Assistant  Masteb  at  Eton. 


NEW    YORK: 
CHARLES   SCRIBNER'S   SONS, 

1888. 


138098 


TROW» 

PRINTING  AND  BOOKBINDING  COMPANY, 

NIW  YOflK. 


PREFACE, 


This  Essay  obtained  the  "Hare  Prize"  at  Cam- 
bridge in  1886,  the  subject  chosen  by  the  Exami- 
ners being  "The  Social  Life  of  Rome  in  the  1st 
Century,  a.d."  It  is  now  published  with  a  few 
alterations  and  corrections,  but  nearly  in  its 
original  form. 

W.  R.  I. 
Jan.  1888. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


INTRODUCTORY. 

PAGK. 
Scope  of  the  Essay       -..*•••••    ix 
List  of  Modern  Authorities  used  •       •••••    xii 


CHAPTER  L 

RELIGION. 

Political  Character  of  Roman  Religion        .        .       .       •  1 

Legal  Formulism  in  Religion        ......  2 

Belief  in  a  Future  Life          .••••••  8 

Foreign  Elements          ..••••••  5- 

Type  of  Character  fostered  .......  7 

Causes  of  Decline  .        ........  8 

Its  Extent  estimated 10 

Attitude  of  Society  towards  Divination,  &c.         .        .        .12 

Faith  in  the  Supernatural  still  strong 15 

Superstitions id. 

Reaction  in  favour  of  Positive  and  Emotional  Religion       .  18 
Growing  Influence  of  Oriental  Type  of  Faith      .        •        .19 

Summary ,        .  20 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  H 

PHILOSOPHY. 

PAGE. 
Social  Importance  of  Moral  Philosophy  at  Rome         .        .    22 
Neo- Stoicism  at  Rome  in  the  First  Century  .        ,        ,23 

Its  Influence  for  Good 24 

Its  Defects 26 

Seneca 28 

Causes  of  Unpopularity  of  Philosophy  .        ,        ,        .29 

Social  Position  of  Philosophers    ......    81 


CHAPTER  IIL 

MORALITY. 

Divisions  of  the  Subject :  Integrity      .....    S3 
Dishonesty  and  Love  of  Money    ......    35 

"  Cajtlatio " id. 

General  Dishonesty  and  Corruption 36 

Humanity.    Nature  of  Roman  Cruelty         .        .        .        .39 
Awakening  Sentiment  of  Humanity     .        .        ,        .        .41 

Treatment  of  Slaves  in  First  Century id. 

Punishment  of  Criminals      .        .        .        .        ,        .        .45 

Street  Bullies 46 

Relief  of  the  Poor  and  Unfortunate 48 

Kindness  to  Animals 51 

The  Gladiatorial  Shows 53 

Purity.     Corruption  of  the  Age 61 

Exceptions 63 

Improved  Conception  of  Morality  visible     .        .        .        .64 

Murder  and  Homicide 67 

Destruction  of  Infant  Life 69 

Suicide  ...........    70 

Conclusion    ..........    73 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  GOVERNMENT  AND  SOCIETY. 

PAGE. 
75 

77 
78 
79 
82 
84 
85 
86 
id. 
88 
89 
90 
91 


Connection  between  Politics  and  Social  Life       . 
The  Government  in  general  not  intrusive     .        . 

Exceptions 

"  Worship  of  the  Emperors      ..... 
Liberty  of  Speech  and  Pasquinade        .        . 
Unreality  a  Consequence  of  Despotism         . 
JL  0-/ .'   Feeling  of  Society  towards  the  Empire, .  Conquest 
Republican  Modesty  of  the  Emperors  . 
Idea  of  Subjection  familiar  .        .        .        .        . 
Unity  of  Civilised  World  a  Gift  of  the  Empire    . 

The  Provinces  gained  by  it 

Municipal  Patriotism 

The  Empire  satisfied  the  Wants  of  the  Majority  . 


CHAPTER  V. 

LITERATURE  AND  ART. 

Cramping  Effect  of  Despotism  on  Literature       ...  93 

System  of  Education  :  Its  Results        .....  96 

Straining  after  Effect 96 

Characteristics  of  different  Periods  :  The  Julian  Era  .        .  id. 

The  Flavian  Era 99 

Literary  Habits 103 

Reaction  in  favour  of  ante- Augustan  Writers       .        .        .  104 

Art  not  indigenous  at  Rome          ......  105 

Dilettantism  in  Art       .        .        .        ,        .        .        ,        .107 

Sculpture      ..........  109 

Pair-ting        ■        ••<.....,  114 

Musio    .......        a        ...  116 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

GRADES  OF  SOCIETY. 

paoh 

The  Imperial  Household       .        .        ,        .        .        ,        .119 

The  Senate 122 

TheEquitea 127 

Professions  :  The  Bar 129 

Teaching 133 

Literature 137 

The  Army 139 

Farming        ..........  140 

Medicine       . id. 

Trades 144 

Clients 147 

Recipients  of  the  State  Dole         ......  150 

Beggars 151 

Aliens.    Italians.     Provincials 152 

Freedmen 155 

Orientals 157 

Slaves 159 

How  were  Slaves  supplied  1  .        .        .        .        .        .        .162 

Kidnapping 163 

Prices  of  Slaves 166 

Treatment  of  Slaves      ........  168 

CHAPTER  VII. 

EDUCATION,  MARRIAGE,  &c. 

Patria  Potettas ,  172 

Education 173 

Marriage        ..........  178 

Women ......,,.,.  180 

Celibacy        ..........  182 

Funeral  Ceremonies      ........  183 


CONTENTS.  vii 


OHAPTBE  VIII. 

DAILY   LIFE. 

PAGE. 
Necessity  of  describing  only  the  Upper  Classes   .        •        .190 
Injustice  thus  done  to  the  Romans       .        .        .        .        .     192 

Early  Morning.     The  Salutations 194 

The  Morning  Hours      ........     195 

The  Dinner 196 

Conversation,  &c. . 199 

Drinking .    202 

Life  in  the  Country 203 

Habits  of  Spurinna  and  the  Elder  Pliny      ,        ,        ,        ,     id. 


CHAPTER  IX 

AMUSEMENTS. 

Political  necessity  of  Public  Amusements    .        .        .        .  206 

Frequency  and  importance  of  Spectacles     ....  208 

Gladiatorial  Games       ........  209 

How  the  Combatants  were  procured 211 

Training  of  the  Gladiators    .        .        .        .        .        .        .212 

Scene  in  the  Amphitheatre  .        .        .        •        .        .        .215 

The  Circus 216 

Factions  of  the  Circus 219 

Popularity  of  the  Jockeys     . 220 

The  Theatre 222 

The  Farce  and  the  Mime 223 

Political  Allusions 225 

The  Pantomime    .                228 

a 


CONTENTS. 


PAGE, 

Social  Position  of  Actors      ,        •       t       •       •       •       •    229 

Athletic  Contests  .        .        .        ,        ,        ,        .        .        .231 
Public  Baths         .        .        ,        .        .        .        .        .        .232 

Watering  Places  .........    235 

Games  at  Ball       .........    236 

Field-Sports 237 

Games  of  Chance         «•••••••    238 


CHAPTER  X 

LUXURY. 

The  First  Century  of  the  Empire  the  most  Luxurious         .  240 

Nature  of  Roman  Civilisation 241 

Magnificence  of  Buildings    .......  243 

Private  Houses      .........  245 

Furniture 254 

Dress     ...........  258 

Luxury  of  the  Table .  262 

Considerations  on  this  Subject     ..*••.  266 

R6sum6  of  the  Chapter         •       ••••<•  270 

Conclusion    ••••••••••  274 


INTRODUCTOKY. 

— ♦ — 

The  manners  and  customs  of  the  Romans  at  the 
time  of  their  greatest  power  and  civilisation  have 
naturally  been  made  the  subject  of  much  research 
and  many  speculative  treatises.  They  have  been 
reconstructed  in  the  minutest  details  from  the 
evidence  of  those  ancient  authorities  which  time 
has  spared  us,  and  from  the  relics  which  ex- 
cavation has  continually  been  bringing  to  light. 
Thanks  to  the  labours  of  scholars  and  archaeo- 
logists in  Germany  and  elsewhere,  we  can  picture 
to  ourselves  many  scenes  of  Roman  life  with 
as  much  clearness  and  accuracy  as  those  which 
we  see  around  us.  The  dress  which  the  Roman 
citizen  wore,  the  structure  and  furniture  of  the 
house  in  which  he  lived,  the  library  in  which  he 
studied,  the  banquets  in  which  he  shared,  have  all 

b 


INTRODUCTORY. 


been  described  with  a  minuteness  which  leaves  but 
little  to  be  added.  With  equal  accuracy  and 
exhaustiveness,  the  names  and  functions  of  the 
different  slaves,  the  ceremonies  attending  mar- 
riages and  funerals,  the  position  of  the  various 
buildings  of  public  resort  at  Rome,  have  been 
discussed  and  determined,  till  there  seems  to  be 
but  little  left  for  ingenuity  to  effect  in  the  work 
of  reconstruction,  except  by  compelling  the  earth 
to  yield  up  more  of  the  treasures  which  she  still 
hides  beneath  her  surface. 

To  collect  or  endeavour  to  add  to  these  details 
is  not  the  purpose  of  this  treatise.  Such  an  at- 
tempt, if  not  utterly  vain,  would  necessarily  destroy 
the  proportion  of  the  parts,  and  encumber  the  pages 
with  a  mass  of  citation.  Details  of  this  kind  can 
only  be  introduced  in  an  essay  of  modest  dimen- 
sions, where  they  seem  required  for  the  purpose  of 
illustrating  some  larger  feature  of  the  subject.  For 
the  most  part  generalizations  must  take  the  place 
of  minute  description,  and  the  subjective  side  of 
civilisation  in  the  first  century  occupy  more  atten- 


INTRODUCTORY. 


tion  than  the  objective.  If  the  really  characteristic 
points  in  that  civilisation  can  be  seized,  and  the 
most  important  phenomena  given  their  due  pro- 
minence, the  object  of  the  essay  will  have  been 
attained. 

The  scheme  of  arrangement  which  we  have 
chosen  will  be  easily  understood  from  the  head- 
ings of  the  chapters.  Religion,  Philosophy,  and 
Morality,  treated,  as  far  as  possible,  in  their  social 
aspects,  occupy  the  first  place.  Then  follows  a 
short  chapter  on  the  social  influence  of  Imperialism 
in  the  first  century.  The  Literature  and  Art  of  the 
the  period  are  next  considered,  after  which  we 
have  endeavoured  to  analyse  Roman  society  into 
its  component  parts,  discussing  briefly  the  various 
grades  into  which  the  community  was  divided. 
Then  descending  more  into  detail,  we  have  de- 
scribed the  life  of  the  individual,  first  tracing,  in  out- 
line, the  ordinary  course  of  a  Roman's  career  from 
the  cradle  to  the  grave,  and  then  giving  some 
account  of  the  daily  habits  of  the  best -known 
sections  of  society.    Public  amusements  form  the 

c 


INTRODUC. 


JORY. 


subject  of  the  next  chapter,  and  the  last  contains  a 
consideration  of  the  luxury  of  the  wealthy  classes. 
We  subjoin  a  list  of  the  chief  modern  works 
which  we  have  consulted. 

flecker.    Gallus. 

Capes.     Early  Empire.     Stoicism. 

Champagny.     Les  Cedars. 

Coulanges.    La  Cite  Antique. 

flureau  de  la  Malle.    L'Economie  Politique  des  Eomains. 

Freeman.    Essays,  vol.  2. 

Furneaux.    Tacitus'  Annals,  Introd. 

Friedlander.     Sittengeschichte  Horns. 

Froude.     Short  Studies,  3. 

(ribbon.     Decline  and  Fall. 

Gruhl  and  Koner.    Life  of  Greeks  and  Eomana 

Lechy.    History  of  European  Morals. 

Marquardt.     Das  Privatleben  der  Eomer. 

Merivale.    History. 

Seeley.    Essays. 

Wallon.    L'Esclavage  dans  l'Antiquitd. 


CHAPTER  I. 


RELIGION. 

The  national  religion  of  the  Roman  people  was  a 
part  of  the  polity  of  the  republic.  The  gods  were 
among  the  possessions  of  the  burgess  body,  and 
their  protection  was  one  of  the  privileges  which 
citizenship  conferred.  As  was  natural,  the  abode 
of  the  divinities  bore  a  close  resemblance  to  the 
earthly  city  under  their  care.  Every  natural 
phenomenon,  every  mental  conception,  had  its 
counterpart  in  the  world  of  gods.  These  gods 
were  not,  like  those  of  the  Greeks,  transformed 
into  living  personalities,  with  definite  characters 
and  varied  histories.  They  were  vaguely  con- 
ceived abstractions,  which  never  acquired  palpable 
substance.  Equally  removed  from  anthropomor- 
phism and  from  mysticism,  the  Roman  religion 
never  developed  either  a  mythology  or  a  secret 
cult,  nor  did  the  intellectual  or  philosophic  spirit 
exercise  itself  greatly  in  the  manufacture  of  reli- 

A 


SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 


gious  symbolism.  The  gods  remained  dimly  con- 
ceived personifications  of  their  eponymous  quali- 
ties, realities  indeed  to  the  many,  but  not  possessed 
of  any  attributes  to  captivate  the  imagination  or 
to  kindle  moral  enthusiasm.  Neither  imagination 
nor  enthusiasm  were  congenial  to  the  Roman 
spirit,  and  that  spirit  was  faithfully  reproduced  in 
the  national  belief.  The  relations  between  man 
and  God  were  conceived  in  a  thoroughly  practical 
and  utilitarian,  not  to  say  commercial  spirit.  The 
legal  formulism,  which  it  is  the  pride  of  Rome  to 
have  developed,  invaded  from  the  earliest  date  the 
province  of  religion.  The  moral  law  as  promul- 
gated under  the  sanction  of  religion  resembled  a 
code  rather  than  deductions  from  a  principle.  The 
service  of  the  gods  generally  consisted  in  a  kind  of 
bargaining,  in  which  the  worshipper  expected  to 
receive  full  value,  generally  in  kind,  for  every  act 
of  homage  and  devotion.  It  was  possible  occa- 
sionally to  overreach  a  benignant  deity,  and  on  the 
other  hand  it  was  necessary  for  the  worshipper  to 
avoid  any  mistakes  in  form  which  might  enable 
the  god  to  evade  his  part  of  the  contract.  This 
explains  the  function  of  the  pontiffs,  who  acted  as 
professors  of  spiritual  jurisprudence  ;  not  as  media- 


THE  OLD  FAITH. 


tors  between  the  contracting  parties,  but  as  ad- 
visers retained  by  the  human  suppliant.  Unworthy 
as  this  conception  of  religion  is,  it  was  not  without 
real  usefulness  to  the  Roman  community.  The 
gods  were  not  less  truly  believed  in  because  their 
natures  were  dimly  conceived,  and  their  attributes 
of  a  not  very  exalted  character.  The  offender 
against  the  moral  law  was  felt  to  be  severely 
punished  by  the  simple  anathema  which  declared 
him  sacer,  and  no  longer  under  the  protection  of 
the  Capitoline  Jupiter.  Though  in  itself  a  cold  and 
uninspiring  faith,  it  derived  strength  and  warmth 
from  its  connection  with  the  civic  body.  It  was 
no  galling  chain,  but  a  veritable  alliance  that 
bound  the  Roman  church  to  the  Roman  state. 
Religion  found  its  noblest  expression  in  patriotism, 
and  patriotism  its  sanction  and  support  in  religion. 
The  doctrine  of  a  future  life,  so  important  as  a 
moral  influence  in  all  societies,  shared  at  Rome 
the  vagueness  which  characterised  the  other  reli- 
gious beliefs  of  the  people.  No  legends  of  heroes 
and  demigods  bridged  over  the  chasm  between 
mortality  and  the  world  of  spirits.*    The  existence 

*  Such  stories  as  afterwards  appeared  bear  evident  traces  of 
their  foreign  origin. 

A  2 


SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 


of  the  soul  after  death  was  held  rather  as  a  theory 
than  as  a  dogma*  ;  and  we  seldom  find  it  used  in 
an  argument  without  a  parenthetical  apology  such 
as  "  if  the  common  belief  be  true."  Such  a  half- 
hearted faith  could  have  little  effect  on  life  or 
conduct.  We  should  remember,  however,  that  the 
educated  persons,  whose  writings  have  come  down 
to  us,  are  not  fair  representatives  of  the  mass  of 
the  people.  The  righteous  indignation  with  which 
Lucretius  attacks  the  fables  about  hell,  current 
among  the  vulgar,  seems  to  show  that  belief  in  a 
future  punishment  was  strong  enough  to  cause 
considerable  trouble  and  unhappiness  in  the  minds 
of  many.  It  is  indeed  curious  that,  so  far  as  belief 
in  immortality  existed  at  Rome,  it  acted  not  as  an 
almost  necessary  consolation,  as  in  modem  Chris- 
tian societies,  but  as  a  gloomy  and  tormenting 
apprehension,  the  desire  for  continued  existence 
being  neutralised  by  the  fear  of  Minos  and  Cer- 
berus. In  other  words,  while  our  tendency  is  to 
dwell  exclusively  on  the  brighter  side  of  the  doc- 
trine, the  ancients  seem  seldom  to  have  sought 

*  The  remark  of  Champagny,  "  Pour  lui  "  (the  Roman)  "  l'im- 
mortalite  de  la  famille  et  de  la  patrie  remplacait  1'immortaliW 
de  son  ame,"  shews  a  profound  comprehension  of  the  spirit  of 
Paganism. 


FOREIGN  INFLUENCES. 


pleasure  or  consolation  in  the  anticipation  of  future 
happiness,  and  to  have  vexed  their  souls  by  gloomy 
forebodings  of  the  infernal  regions. 

The  Roman  religion  was  not  radically  altered  by 
the  various  foreign  elements  that  became  incor- 
porated with  it.  The  gloomy  faith  of  the  Etrus- 
cans, the  genial  mythology  of  the  Greeks,  the 
fanatical  mysticism  of  Asia,  all  left  their  mark  on 
the  liberal  religion  of  the  conquering  republic, 
always  ready  to  tolerate  and  find  room  for  the 
various  gods  of  the  nations  whom  the  sword  of 
the  legions  had  ejected  from  their  homes.  But  so 
long  as  the  Capitol  remained  the  centre  of  Roman 
religion,  and  Romans  were  Romans  by  blood  and 
not  by  adoption,  the  foundations  of  the  national 
religion  continued  firm,  and  withstood  the  assaults 
of  foreign  divinities.  Greek  and  oriental  gods  were 
allowed  their  places  in  heaven,  as  their  votaries 
were  permitted  to  reside  at  Rome,  but  conquest 
had  discredited  both  alike,  and  gods  as  well  as 
men  were  expected  to  acknowledge  their  superiors. 
In  the  case  of  Greece,  indeed,  the  process  of  iden- 
tifying the  two  celestial  companies  won  accept- 
ance, the  identification  being  in  some  cases  true, 
in  others  fictitious.     But  Jupiter  Capitolinus  re- 


SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 


fused  to  array  himself  in  the  garb  of  Olympian 
Zeus,  nor  did  Venus  Cloacina  readily  adapt  herself 
to  the  character  of  Idalian  Aphrodite.  Still  less 
could  the  Phrygian  mother  of  the  gods,  with  her 
mutilated  priests  and  ecstatic  orgies,  find  a  place 
in  the  sober  and  dignified  assemblage  of  Latin 
deities.  Her  worship,  when  at  length  it  took  root 
in  Rome,  found  its  congenial  soil  among  the  "  step- 
sons of  Italy,"  who  were  silently  swamping  the 
good  old  stock,  and  it  was  as  a  heresy  ©r  new  reli- 
gion that  it  appeared,  not  as  a  part  of  the  national 
faith.  Pliant  and  liberal  as  that  faith  appeared,  it 
was  in  reality  conservative,  unchanging,  and  in- 
capable of  development.  It  flourished  while  its 
creators  maintained  their  vigour  and  their  national 
unity :  it  decayed  when  corruption  and  division 
had  weakened  that  vigour  and  dissolved  that 
unity :  it  flickered  now  and  again  with  a  sem- 
blance of  vitality  as  Rome  made  fitful  efforts  to 
return  to  her  former  self;  and  it  finally  expired 
with  the  last  throes  of  the  sovereign  nation,  main- 
taining to  the  last  that  exclusive  civic  character 
which  had  been  its  strength  and  was  now  its 
weakness. 
The  type  of  character  which  this  religion  tended 


ROMAN  "PIETAS." 


to  produce  was  rather  dignified  than  attractive, 
rather  admirable  than  amiable.  The  unselfish  im- 
pulses, the  self-sacrifice,  which  are  the  food  of  all 
religion,  took  the  form  of  national  esprit  de  corps, 
and  worked  exclusively  within  that  narrow  limit. 
Humanity  in  the  larger  sense  found  hardly  any 
place  in  the  moral  code.  The  sphere  of  duty  was 
the  state,  and  its  miniature  the  family.  Courage, 
self-devotion,  industry,  frugality,  were  practised  or 
admired  as  civic  virtues,  conducive  to  the  welfare 
of  the  community.  Piety  towards  the  gods  and 
obedience  to  the  magistrates  were  duties  of  the 
same  kind.  Marriage  and  education  were  public 
duties,  to  be  performed  in  no  self-regarding  spirit. 
The  result  was  a  somewhat  hard,  but  very  strong 
national  character.  Duty  was  ever  present,  and 
asserted  itself  in  every  act  of  life.  No  doubt  or 
conflict  of  motives  was  possible.  Divided  alle- 
giance could  not  be  thought  of  while  Jove  and  the 
city  of  Rome  remained*  to  claim  the  service  of  the 
citizen  :  in  life  or  in  death  the  Roman  belonged 
not  to  himself,  but  to  the  state.  It  was  this  that 
carried  the  Roman  power  over  three  continents, 

*  Incolumi  Jove  et  urbe  Boma,  Hor.    The  expression  is  highly 
characteristic 


SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 


and  enabled  the  city  on  the  Tiber  to  attain  its 
unique  position.  Never  since  the  fall  of  Paganism 
have  the  civic  virtues  shone  out  so  brilliantly : 
never  since,  perhaps,  have  religion  and  patriotism 
made  so  potent  an  alliance. 

The  foregoing  remarks  will  have  indicated  to 
some  extent  the  causes  of  the  decline  of  religion 
which  marked  the  last  century  of  the  republic  and 
the  succeeding  period.  Moral  enthusiasm  was 
never  excited  by  the  national  religion  except  in 
the  form  of  patriotism,  and  the  expansion  of  the 
empire  had  made  patriotism  a  less  absorbing  prin- 
ciple than  heretofore.  Self-sacrifice  seemed  hardly 
necessary,  when  Rome  was  already  mistress  of  the 
world.  The  privileges  of  citizenship  were  now  so 
apparent  and  so  great  that  its  obligations  naturally 
fell  into  the  background.  The  Roman  no  longer 
felt  himself  a  member  of  a  militant  community ; 
he  was  the  possessor  of  a  rich  inheritance,  which 
his  ancestors  had  won  for  him  to  enjoy.  Thus  the 
living  spark  which  had  kept  alive  the  smouldering 
fire  of  Roman  faith  was  nearly  extinguished.  It 
was  certain  that  the  unattractive  dogmas  which 
remained  would  not  command  much  respect  after 
it  was  gone.  Nor  was  the  prosperity  of  the  Empire 


DECAY  OF  FAITH. 


the  only  reason  for  the  decay  of  patriotic  faith. 
The  constant  influx  of  foreigners  from  every 
quarter  of  the  world,  especially  from  the  East, 
was  fatal  to  the  national  religion.  Neither 
natural  propensities  nor  tradition  led  these  new- 
comers to  embrace  the  religion  of  their  conquerors. 
None  but  Romans  could  be  faithful  worshippers  of 
the  Roman  gods.  The  old  stock,  an  ever-decreas- 
ing minority,  could  make  no  stand  against  an 
invasion  of  aliens  often  intellectually  their  superiors, 
who  brought  with  them  not  merely  cosmopolitan 
indifference,  but  the  powerful  destructive  force  of 
Greek  philosophy.  Among  the  educated  classes 
the  combined  influence  of  these  two  causes  made 
rapid  havoc  of  the  old  faith.  The  tendency  to 
materialism  was  increased  by  the  corrupt  and 
licentious  life  that  had  become  common  through 
wealth  and  idleness.  The  moral  sense,  always 
restricted  within  narrow  limits,  was  blunted  by  the 
institution  of  slavery  and  the  other  injustices  of 
irresponsible  power.  In  most  cases  the  simple 
faith  of  former  days  was  as  completely  obsolete  as 
the  frugal  fare  of  the  citizen-farmer.  The  belief  in 
immortality  was  openly  ridiculed.  In  Cicero's 
time  hardly  an  old  woman  could  be  found,  if  we 


10  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

believe  the  writer,  who  trembled  at  the  fables 
about  the  infernal  regions.*  Even  boys,  says 
Juvenal,  disbelieve  in  the  world  of  spirits.f  The 
existence  of  the  gods,  according  to  these  and 
other  writers,  was  commonly  treated  as  an  open 
question,  and  one  of  not  very  great  importance. 
The  rites  of  religion  were  either  neglected  or  per- 
formed in  a  perfunctory  and  contemptuous  manner. 
The  majority  either  denied  moral  obligation,  or 
attached  it  to  some  system  of  philosophy.  The 
old  religion  as  a  moral  force  seemed  quite  spent 
and  gone. 

We  must  however  be  careful  not  to  accept  the 
statements  of  our  authorities  too  strictly.  The 
leading  writers  of  any  age  are  seldom  the  truest 
exponents  of  the  beliefs  of  the  masses.  The 
attacks  of  freethought  and  philosophy  do  not 
readily  reach  the  uneducated.  Such  expressions 
as  those  of  Cicero  and  Juvenal  above  referred  to, 
are  often  hastily  made,  and  must  be  weighed  with 
due  caution.  There  are  many  indications  that 
upon  the  lower  classes  at  least  religion  still  had  a 
considerable  hold.  It  is,  perhaps,  unsafe  to  lay 
too  much  stress  on  the  very  numerous  monuments 

*  Cic.  de  N.  D.  2.  2.  f  Juvenal,  S.  2.  149. 


VITA  LITY  OF  PA  GA  NISM.  1 1 

that  have  been  found  expressing  a  belief  in  a  future 
life,  for  experience  tells  us  that  pious  or  kindly 
insincerity  haunts  the  tomb  unblamed ;  but  it  is 
fair  to  mention  these  as  a  set  off  against  the 
inscriptions  of  ostentatious  materialism  and  the 
vaunts  of  shallow  philosophy.  A  more  convincing 
proof  of  the  abiding  vitality  of  the  old  Polytheism 
is  furnished  by  the  power  which  it  still  possessed 
of  assimilating  new  elements,  drawn  from  the 
religions  of  the  East  and  of  barbarian  countries. 
Even  newly-created  divinities  from  time  to  time 
appeared,  but  these  were  usually  deceased  or 
living  emperors,  who  owed  their  elevation  rather 
to  flattery  than  to  faith.  The  obstinate  resistance 
which  Paganism  offered  to  Christianity  has  also 
been  justly  quoted  as  indicating  a  firmer  hold  on 
the  old  religion  than  we  generally  attribute  to  its 
later  votaries.  The  struggle  between  the  two 
religions  cannot  be  said  to  have  begun  in  earnest 
till  after  the  close  of  our  period ;  but  we  cannot 
form  a  fair  estimate  of  the  state  of  opinion  in  the 
first  century  without  drawing  upon  later  as  well  as 
earlier  history.  The  tenacity  of  the  old  beliefs 
when  brought  into  contact  with  Christianity  is 
often  remarkable,  and  still  more  so  is  the  attitude 


12  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

of  the  earlier  Christians  to  Paganism.  Jupiter,  and 
Venus,  and  Apollo  were  commonly  regarded  not 
as  fictions  but  as  really  existing  evil  spirits,  by  no 
means  absolutely  powerless.  Even  Pagan  divina- 
tion was  believed  to  be  a  genuine  intercourse  with 
the  spiritual  world.  Hence,  to  do  homage  to  an 
idol  was  an  actual  treason  to  the  Supreme  Being. 
These  indications  shew  that  positive  faith  was  by 
no  means  a  thing  of  the  past  among  the  Pagans  of 
the  empire.  The  subject  which  we  shall  now  enter 
upon  ought  to  give  us  a  more  definite  idea  of  the 
state  of  religion  in  our  period. 

The  belief  that  the  will  of  the  gods  was  in  many 
different  ways  communicated  to  mankind  formed 
a  very  important  part  of  the  religion  both  of 
Greece  and  Rome.  In  Greece  the  oracles,  at 
Rome  the  augurs  and  haruspices,  in  both  the 
astrologers  and  interpreters  of  dreams,  were 
believed  to  have  the  power  of  explaining  the 
intentions  and  wishes  of  heaven  to  men.  Por- 
tents and  prodigies  were  vouchsafed,  it  was 
believed,  as  warnings  in  times  of  danger.  Appari- 
tions of  the  gods  in  human  form  were  authenticated 
in  various  places  and  times.  Miracles  of  healing 
and  exhibitions  of  supernatural  power  were  not 


BELIEF  IN  DIVINATION.  13 

unknown.  In  short,  to  the  pious  or  superstitious 
Pagan,  the  gods  were  constantly  making  their 
presence  felt  in  the  daily  order  of  things,  and  it 
became  the  believer  to  be  always  watchful  for  the 
heaven-sent  signs  which  might  have  been  intended 
by  a  gracious  providence  to  save  him  from  ruin  or 
lead  him  to  fortune. 

The  attitude  which  the  educated  world  adopted 
towards  these  widespread  superstitions  is  very  re- 
markable. On  the  one  hand  the  historians  duly 
chronicle  every  prodigy  or  monstrous  birth  that 
they  find  related  in  their  authorities,  so  that  these 
absurdities  fill  a  space  in  their  works  which  it 
would  be  difficult  to  parallel  in  any  other  secular 
histories.  On  the  other,  there  is  no  lack  of 
the  most  contemptuous  disbelief  in  the  whole 
system,  expressed  in  no  doubtful  terms,  by  the 
contemporaries  of  the  historians  who  apparently 
attach  so  much  importance  to  it.  On  the  one 
hand  we  find  Celsus,  in  the  era  of  the  Antonines, 
basing  his  chief  argument  against  Christianity  on 
the  numerous  and  well-attested  miracles  of  Pagan- 
ism, and  especially  on  the  innumerable  instances 
of  fulfilled  prophecies ;  while  on  the  other  Cicero 
in  his  work  on  Divination  appeals  with  equal  con- 


U  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

fidence  to  the  facts  of  history  on  the  other  side, 
recalling  how  Caesar  crossed  over  into  Africa  in 
opposition  to  the  auspices,  and  by  so  doing  pre- 
vented his  enemies  from  uniting  against  him, 
while  his  unsuccessful  antagonist  never  failed  to 
obey  the  warnings  of  the  haruspices;  and  how 
throughout  the  civil  war  these  predictions  either 
remained  unfulfilled,  or  were  directly  falsified.* 
We  find  the  same  writer,  himself  an  augur,  quoting 
with  approval  Cato's  saying  that  he  wondered  how 
one  augur  could  meet  another  without  laughing, 
and  Pliny  the  Younger  sarcastically  suggested  that 
apparently  many  dreams  are  meant  to  be  inter- 
preted by  contraries.!  Innumerable  instances  of 
the  most  absurd  and  childish  superstitions  are 
recorded  even  of  men  of  strong  sense  and  practical 
ability,  while  at  the  same  time  we  might  quote 
passages  condemning  these  superstitions  in  an 
enlightened  manner. 

With  regard  to  the  historians,  some  allowance 
must  be  made  for  the  idea  of  history  then  pre- 
vailing. The  ancient  writers  of  history  endea- 
voured to  be  at  once  dramatic  and  didactic.  The 
narrative  of  the  past  was  often  made  a  peg  on 

*  Cic.  de  Div.  2.  24.  t  Win-  Ep.  1.  18. 


ATTITUDE  OF  HISTORIANS.  15 

which  to  hang  the  author's  rhetorical  displays  and 
his  views  of  morality  and  the  economy  of  the 
world.  Both  these  purposes  were  in  a  measure 
served  by  the  introduction  of  the  supernatural, 
which  can  be  easily  made  picturesque,  and,  to  the 
believer,  instructive.  Prodigies  were  equally  useful 
to  point  a  moral  and  to  adorn  a  tale.  Livy  admits 
that  the  number  of  these  miracles  varies  exactly 
with  the  credulity  of  the  people  among  whom 
they  occur  ;*  but  he  excuses  himself  in  another 
place  by  saying  that  when  he  is  narrating  ancient 
events  his  mind  "takes  somehow  an  ancient  cast,"f 
which  makes  such  stories  seem  appropriate  and 
pleasing,  and  that  it  does  not  seem  to  him  right 
to  pass  over  with  contempt  events  which  the  good 
men  of  former  days  believed  and  preserved.  And 
if  Livy,  a  writer  of  a  poetical  and  uncritical  tem- 
perament, feels  it  necessary  to  apologise  for  tran- 
scribing the  records  of  portents,  we  are  not 
surprised  to  find  that  in  Tacitus  the  mentions  of 
them  are  few  and  far  between.  For  such  as  do 
occur  custom  may  perhaps  be  partly  responsible; 
and  we  in  our  own  day  must  have  often  noticed  the 
peculiar  half-respectful,  half-contemptuous  defer- 
*  Liv.  24.  10.  t  Liv-  *3- 1S- 


16  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME.      • 

ence  which  philosophers  and  freethinkers  in  general 
show  to  popular  superstitions,  a  deference  which 
approaches  what  used  to  be  called  chivalry. 
Modern  histories  furnish  many  parallels  to  Tacitus 
in  this  respect. 

It  would  however  be  a  great  mistake  to  suppose 
that  disbelief  in  the  supernatural  was  the  rule 
among  the  educated  classes.  In  some  form  or 
other  the  natural  tendency  of  the  human  mind 
to  such  beliefs  generally  asserted  itself.  Religion 
had  never  been  a  great  moral  force  in  itself  at 
Rome,  and  now  its  alliance  with  patriotism  was 
being  dissolved :  nothing  remained  but  lifeless 
ntual  and  the  myriad  forms  of  superstition,  which 
only  usurp  the  name  of  religion.  It  was  however 
in  the  form  of  superstition  that  Paganism  now 
chiefly  lived  on.  It  is  here,  and  here  only,  that  we 
find  the  fear  of  the  gods  influencing  human  action. 
The  man  of  pleasure,  who  scoffed  at  the  idea  of 
moral  retribution  for  the  grossest  of  his  crimes, 
trembled  at  a  serpent  in  his  path,  and  paid  an 
Oriental  astrologer  to  read  his  fortune.  An  eclipse 
still  caused  a  panic  in  the  Imperial  legions.  The 
despot,  who  trampled  without  scruple  on  every 
law,  human  or  divine,  was  accustomed  to  crawl 


PREVALENCE  OF  SUPERSTITION.  17 

under  his  bed  at  the  sound  of  thunder.*  To 
"enquire  into  the  years"  of  the  emperor's  life 
was  high  treason.  Every  form  of  spiritualism  had 
its  hierophants.  Rome  swarmed  with  quacks  and 
impostors  from  every  corner  of  the  empire,  who 
made  a  handsome  profit  out  of  the  credulity  of  their 
masters.  The  women  were  even  more  addicted 
to  these  absurdities  than  the  men,  and  Roman 
ladies  were  often  the  slaves  of  an  astute  priest  or 
astrologer.  Scarcely  anyone  was  strong-minded 
enough  to  reject  the  whole  mass  of  superstition. 
Even  Pliny  the  Elder  considered  that  there  might 
be  something  in  dreams,  and  the  majority  never 
thought  of  questioning  their  truth  as  predictions 
of  the  future.  Incapable  for  the  most  part  of 
influencing  any  action  for  good,  this  melancholy 
substitute  for  religion  continued  to  vex  the  souls 
of  men  and  women,  and  divert  their  thoughts 
from  any  impulse  towards  a  higher  life.  It  was 
the  fate  of  Paganism  thus  to  drift  into  dreary 
shallows  when  cut  adrift  from  the  anchor  which 
had  bound  it  to  the  citadel  of  Romulus. 

The  anxious  search  for  spiritual  food  sometimes 
led  men  to  wander  beyond  the  precincts  of  the 

*  Suet.  Cal.  2. 
B 


18  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

Roman  Olympus.  Isis  and  Serapis  already  num- 
bered many  votaries  of  both  sexes  in  the  first 
century.  It  was  a  common  complaint  that  the 
gods  of  despised  Eastern  nations  were  usurping  the 
honours  of  Capitoline  Jove.  Legislative  enactments 
were  called  into  play  in  the  vain  hope  of  stopping 
the  advancing  tide.  Throughout  the  period  alien 
worships  came  more  and  more  into  vogue,  and  were 
embraced  with  an  enthusiasm  which  contrasted  pain- 
fully with  the  languid  conformity  of  the  orthodox. 
The  causes  of  this  movement  lay  far  too  deep  to  be 
touched  by  the  legislator.  For  the  last  hundred 
and  fifty  years  (I  speak  of  the  middle  of  our  period) 
the  dry  ethics  of  Stoicism  and  the  negations  of 
Epicureanism  had  practically  divided  the  Roman 
mind  between  them.  We  need  not  go  into  the 
causes,  already  partly  discussed,  which  made  a  re- 
action in  favour  of  positive  and  emotional  religion 
natural  and  inevitable.  It  will  be  enough  to  men- 
tion the  influence  of  Alexandria,  the  influx  of 
Orientals  into  Rome,  the  decrease  of  the  Roman 
stock,  and  the  inherent  inability  of  the  systems 
above  mentioned  to  meet  the  requirements  of  the 
human  mind.  These  requirements  seemed  to  be 
satisfied  by  the  mystic  religions  of  the  East,  which 


GROWING  INFLUENCE  OF  THE  EAST.      IS 

subordinated  the  intellect  to  the  emotions,  and 
were  based  not  on  reasoning  but  onecstacy :  which 
regarded  the  body  as  a  disgrace  or  burden,  and 
pleasure  as  an  evil ;  which  substituted  a  new  ideal 
for  the  civic  virtues  that  had  lost  their  cogency, 
and  again  held  out  the  bright  hope  of  a  future  life, 
which  had  been  growing  dimmer  and  fainter 
through  the  long  period  of  hardness  and  indulgence. 
Like  all  other  moral  and  social  revolutions,  this 
change  began  from  the  lower  strata  of  society. 
The  slaves,  the  poor,  the  unprivileged,  the  expa- 
triated, were  the  first  to  turn  for  consolation  to  the 
new  source  opened  to  them.  Among  them  the  mono- 
theistic creeds  of  the  East  first  took  root ;  among 
them  Judaism  made  its  proselytes,  and  Christianity 
its  earliest  converts.  But  the  movement  was  not 
long  in  extending  itself  to  the  rich  and  powerful. 
Already  in  our  period  we  have  indications  which 
in  the  light  of  succeeding  history  we  can  read,  as 
shewing  the  growing  influence  of  Alexandria  and 
Palestine.  The  gentleness  which  tempers  the 
stoicism  of  Seneca,  the  almost  feminine  sweetness 
of  Epictetus,  the  affection  and  resignation  of 
Quintilian  under  domestic  bereavement,  the  com- 
plaints in  Juvenal  of  the  spread  of  Jewish  and 

B  2 


20  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

Oriental  superstitions,  the  edicts  banishing  Jews 
from  Rome,  are  signs  of  various  kinds  which  might 
escape  our  notice  if  we  had  not  later  events  to 
help  us.  With  those  events  we  need  not  hesitate 
to  ascribe  them  to  that  influence  which,  even  then 
at  work  and  powerful,  though  obscure  and  little 
noticed,  was  at  last  to  overthrow  the  temples  of 
the  Pagan  gods,  and  establish  Christianity  as  the 
religion  of  the  Empire. 

To  sum  up  briefly  the  results  arrived  at  in  this 
chapter,  the  national  religion  of  Rome  derived  its 
force  as  a  moral  principle  from  its  alliance  with  the 
civic  spirit.  That  spirit  from  various  causes  had 
declined,  and  religion  in  consequence  became  a 
routine  of  barren  ritual,  or  a  vehicle  of  puerile 
superstition.  Among  the  educated  the  prevailing 
tone  was  a  careless  Agnosticism,  which  tolerated 
religion  as  a  serviceable  instrument  for  guiding  the 
vulgar  mind,  but  was  itself  by  no  means  exempt 
from  the  popular  superstitions.  The  uneducated 
masses  still  retained  their  faith  in  the  gods,  but 
the  influence  of  their  religion  on  their  morality 
was  almost  nil.  A  crowd  of  superstitions  kept  the 
spiritual  world  constantly  in  their  minds,  but  in  a 
manner  that  could  exercise  no  wholesome  influence 


SIGNS  OF  COMING  CHANGE.  21 

on  their  character.  In  this  unhappy  condition  men 
began  to  turn  to  the  East,  and  to  fall  under  the  in- 
fluence of  the  mystical  and  ecstatic  worships  which 
were  there  indigenous.  The  moral  revolution  thus 
begun  ramified  first  chiefly  among  the  despised 
classes,  but  before  the  close  of  the  first  century 
had  begun  to  attract  educated  minds  whom  the 
Graeco-Roman  philosophies  of  the  Stoa  and  of 
Epicurus  could  no  longer  satisfy. 


(    22    ) 


CHAPTER  II. 


PHILOSOPHY. 

One  of  the  consequences  of  the  defective  and 
unsatisfying  character  of  Roman  religion  was  the 
importance  and  prominence  of  moral  philosophy. 
Men  turned  to  Stoicism  or  Epicureanism  to  supply 
them  with  a  rule  of  life  which  they  could  not  find 
in  the  worship  of  the  gods.  So  completely  was 
that  worship  dissociated  from  ethical  teaching,  that 
it  was  left  for  philosophers  to  evolve  and  inculcate 
that  important  function  of  religion.  The  social 
influence  of  moral  philosophy  was  therefore  infi- 
nitely greater  than  at  the  present  day,  when  the 
majority  find  in  religion  all  the  guidance  that  they 
need. 

Two  systems  of  philosophy,  Stoicism  and  Epicu- 
reanism, flourished  at  Rome  in  the  first  century. 
To  these  perhaps  we  should  add  the  Neo-Pytha- 
gorean  School,  which  ultimately  gave  birth  to  the 
New  Platonism  of  Alexandria.    It  may,  however, 


ROMAN  STOICISM.  23 

be  said  that  philosophy  at  Rome  in  the  first 
century  means  Stoicism,  so  completely  did  the 
doctrines  of  Zeno — transplanted,  not  without  modi- 
fication, into  Roman  soil — overshadow  all  other 
systems  of  ethics.  Stoicism  was  in  fact  very  well 
suited  to  the  Roman  temperament.  Abandoning 
the  transcendental  part  of  Greek  Stoicism,  the 
Romans  found  in  the  austere  renunciations  and 
rigid  dogmatism  of  the  system  a  rule  well  suited 
to  the  hardness  of  their  national  temperament. 
The  ideal  Roman  character,  which  still  lived  in 
theory,  and  was  occasionally  even  now  almost 
realised  in  a  Thrasea  or  an  Arria,  was  very  much 
like  that  of  the  stoic  "  sage."  Inflexible  devotion 
to  virtue,  imperturbable  serenity  of  temperament, 
contempt  of  worldly  goods  and  misfortunes,  justice 
to  others  without  sympathy,  were  Roman  qualities 
and  stoic  maxims  :  and  even  the  stoic  conception 
of  the  Deity — half  monotheistic,  half  pantheistic, 
though  it  did  not  enter  much  into  the  Neo-Stoicism 
of  Rome — was  hardly  alien  to  the  spirit  of  Roman 
religion.  But  the  constraining  power  which  Stoicism 
exerted  lay  in  its  assertion  of  abstract  right  and 
duty,  the  duty  of  "  living  according  to  nature,"  as 
they  expressed  it,  that  is,  of  fulfilling  the  law  of 


24  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  HOME. 

our  being,  which  is  to  follow  virtue  and  virtue 
alone,  "  in  scorn  of  consequence,"  and  to  rise  supe- 
rior to  all  the  changes  and  chances  of  mortal  life, 
which  are  not  really  evils,  for  "  there  is  nothing  bad, 
but  thinking  makes  it  so,"  except  vice.  It  would 
be  easy  to  illustrate  the  sublimity  of  this  doctrine 
from  the  writings  and  actions  of  its  votaries ;  easy 
also  to  shew  how  attractive  it  must  have  been  to 
men  living  under  a  corrupt  despotism,  where  a  good 
man  had  to  be  "a  law  unto  himself,"  and  inde- 
pendent of  his  surroundings  for  noble  life  and 
mental  happiness.  Stoicism  was  in  fact  a  noble 
witness  against  some  of  the  worst  tendencies  of 
the  age.  It  was,  in  the  first  place,  a  standing  pro- 
test against  materialism.  In  a  period  when  every- 
one hunted  wealth  and  comfort  with  a  feverish 
activity,  it  declared  that  the  sage  alone  is  rich, 
happy,  and  powerful :  that  the  millionaire  on  his 
banquet-couch  may  be  in  far  worse  case  than  the 
slave  on  the  rack,*  and  that  everything  which  the 
world  deems  valuable  is  aZiatyopov,  indifferent,  un- 
worthy of  the  attention  of  a  wise  man.  Again,  it 
necessarily  tended  to  break  down  the  barriers  of 

*  "  Jacere  in  convivio  malum  est,  torqueri  in  eculeo  bonum,  si 
illud  turpiter  hoc  honeste  fit."    Sen.  Ep.  71. 


GRANDEUR  OF  THE  STOIC  IDEAL.  25 

classes.  The  consistent  Stoic  must  admit  that  his 
slaves  may  be  his  superiors,  and  cannot  treat  them 
as  mere  chattels.  In  its  logical  conclusion,  Stoicism 
meant  the  natural  equality  of  all  mankind.  Seneca 
is  often  led  into  expressions  which  imply  this,  and 
Epictetus  in  the  true  Christian  tone  says,  "We 
are  all  brothers,  because  we  are  God's  children." 
The  growth  of  humanity  in  the  latter  half  of  the 
century,  which  will  occupy  us  in  part  of  the  next 
chapter,  and  especially  the  increasing  gentleness  to 
slaves,  was  in  no  small  degree  the  work  of  stoic 
philosophy.  Lastly,  Stoicism  operated  in  placing 
before  men  a  purer  conception  of  God.  Let  us 
quote,  first,  Persius'  energetic  protest  against  the 
commercial  view  of  sacrifice  which  we  mentioned 
in  the  last  chapter, 

"  Compositum  jus  fasque  animo,  sanctosque  recessns 
Mentis,  et  incoctum  generoso  pectus  honesto. 
Hanc  cedo  ut  admoveam  templis,  et  farce  litabo."* 

and  then  refer  to — we  have  not  space  to  quote — 
the  numerous  and  beautiful  maxims  of  Seneca, 
which  made  Christian  apologists  claim  him  as 
"seepe  noster."  Shadowy  and  scarcely  personal 
as  the  stoic   deity  was,  his  attributes  were  far 

•  Pers.  2.  ad  fin. 


26  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

more  divine  than  those  of  the  objects  of  popular 
worship. 

Great  as  were  the  merits  of  Stoicism,  its  defects 
were  equally  great,  and  inseparable  from  its 
character.  The  minds  of  the  Romans  at  this  time 
were  only  too  receptive  of  these  faults.  What  can 
be  more  startling  than  the  arrogance  of  philosophy 
towards  heaven  ?  It  was  the  boast  of  the  sage 
"  to  fear  neither  man  nor  God":*  "  from  man," 
says  Seneca  in  another  place,  "  not  much  is  to  be 
feared,  from  God  nothing  ":f  "  the  wise  man  sur- 
veys mankind  from  above,  the  gods  from  an  equal 
level ":%  nay,  in  some  respects  the  sage  even 
excels  the  Deity,  for  "his  wisdom  is  his  own 
making,  while  God  is  wise  by  nature."^  Nor  was 
it  all  humanity,  as  we  see,  that  was  thus  exalted  to 
an  equality  with  the  gods.  In  spite  of  the  level- 
ling doctrines  which  philosophers  sometimes  enun- 
ciated, their  system  was  really  rigidly  exclusive. 
The  masses,  who  were  ignorant  of  philosophy, 
were  classed  as  slaves  and  madmen,  nor  did  their 
abject  condition  move  the  pity  of  the  sage,  but 
rather  ministered  to  his  spiritual  pride.    Pride,  in 

*  Ep.  75.  t  Sen- Ben-  7.  l. 

%  Ep.  41.  %  Ep.  53. 


RADICAL  DEFECTS  OF  STOICISM.  27 

feet,  was  the  foundation  of  much  of  the  stoical 
system,  and  formed  one  of  its  chief  attractions. 
Almost  more  serious  was  the  destruction  of  the 
sympathies  and  affections,  never  too  warm  at 
Rome,  which  formed  a  definite  part  of  stoic 
teaching.  "  To  feel  pain  at  the  misfortunes  of 
others,"  says  Seneca,  "  is  a  weakness  unworthy  of 
the  wise  man.  .  .  .  Only  weak  eyes  become 
inflamed  at  the  sight  of  ophthalmia  in  other  men."* 
Feeling  was  in  fact  altogether  despised,  while 
intellect  was  enthroned  in  the  seat  of  divinity. 
Knowledge  of  good  and  evil  was  the  aim  and  ob- 
ject of  life.  "  Una  re  consummatur  animus,  scien- 
tia  bonorum  et  malorum."  "  In  Deo  nihil  extra 
animum ;  totus  ratio  est."f  The  result  was  a 
hardness  and  narrowness  of  character  which  pre- 
vented it  from  ever  reaching  perfection.  The 
practical  moralist  might  also  complain  that  the 
porch  offered  no  sufficient  motive  for  a  virtuous 
life.  In  the  sublimity  of  its  ideal  it  forgot  the 
facts  of  human  nature.  It  reproved  vices,  but 
could  not  correct  them.  It  seemed  to  be  made  up 
of  inconsistencies  throughout.  It  exhorted  men 
to  live  according  to  nature,  while  it  repressed  the 

*  Sen.  Clem.  2.  6.  t  Sen-  Nat-  Queest. 


28  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

affections  and  renounced  the  pleasures  which 
nature  bids  us  follow.  It  professed  a  pious  humi- 
lity, while  it  exalted  its  votaries  to  a  level  with 
the  Deity.  It  declared  that  all  men  were  brothers, 
and  at  the  same  time  classed  all  but  its  own  sect  as 
slaves,  fools,  and  madmen.  It  preached  resigna- 
tion to  the  will  of  heaven,  and  at  the  same  time 
counselled  men  to  terminate  their  existence  when- 
ever life  ceased  to  satisfy  them.*  It  was  in  fact 
a  narrow,  one-sided,  and  withal  a  hopeless  creed, 
which  might  give  a  rule  of  life  to  the  noble-minded, 
but  could  do  little  to  regenerate  society. 

We  have  quoted  Seneca  so  often  in  this  chapter 
that  we  must  say  a  few  words  about  his  position 
as  a  Stoic.  It  has  been  said  with  truth  that 
Stoicism  was  no  part  of  Seneca's  nature.  He  ac- 
cepted it  with  his  intellect,  but  his  heart  led  him 
constantly  to  contradict  its  principles.  Hence  the 
inconsistencies  with  which  he  has  been  twitted. 
His  tastes,  character,  and  affections  often  revolted 
against  the  doctrines  of  his  school.    When  he  says, 

*  Stoicism  is  largely  responsible  for  the  epidemics  of  suicide 
which  characterised  this  period,  cf .  Sen.  Bp.  71.  "  Ssepe  et  f ortiter 
pereundum  est,  neque  maximis  de  causis,  nam  nee  maximae  sunt 
quse  nos  terrent."  Suicide  was,  in  fact,  almost  the  logical  conse- 
quence of  the  stoical  view  of  the  state  of  the  world. 


STOICISM  AND  THE  EMPIRE.  29 

"  No  good  thing  can  be  enjoyed  without  a  friend 
to  share  it,"  it  is  the  man,  not  the  philosopher,  who 
speaks.  But  we  need  not  delay  to  reconcile  the 
inconsistencies  in  Seneca's  character.  Perhaps  Garat 
was  right  in  saying  that  we  should  understand  it 
if  we  lived  under  a  reign  of  terror,  such  as  that  of 
Nero  or  Robespierre. 

It  is  more  our  business  to  consider  the  causes  of 
the  undoubted  unpopularity  of  Stoicism  with  the 
government  and  with  society  in  general.  As  regards 
the  former,  it  would  be  difficult  to  find  any  justi- 
fication for  the  charges  of  disloyalty  against  which 
Seneca  defends  philosophy.  It  does  not  appear 
that  as  a  class  the  Stoics  ever  encouraged  rebellion 
or  disaffection.  And  yet  we  find  that  until  after 
Domitian,  philosophers  were  constantly  regarded 
with  disfavour,  and  occasionally  persecuted  and 
driven  from  Rome.  Probably  the  government  had 
an  instinctive  feeling  that  the  spirit  of  Stoicism  was 
hostile  to  despotism.  A  moral  ideal,  capable  of 
leading  men  to  self-sacrifice  and  contempt  of  com- 
fort, was  naturally  distrusted  by  a  monarchy  which 
rested  on  materialism.  Imperialism  might  secure 
wealth  and  ease  to  its  subjects,  but  it  gave  no  scope 
for  lofty  aspirations.    Accordingly  it  instinctively 


30  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

arrayed  itself  against  both  Stoicism  and  Christianity. 
As  regards  popular  opinion,  the  reasons  for  the 
feeling  against  philosophy  lie  more  on  the  surface. 
People  do  not  like  the  presence  of  an  arrogant  and 
severe  class  of  censors,  especially  when  in  spite  of 
some  exaggerations  their  strictures  are  mainly  just. 
The  man  of  pleasure  always  hates  ideas,  and  the 
man  of  the  world  generally*  despises  arts  which  do 
not  tend  to  tangible  advantage.  Hence  the  pecu- 
liar acrimony  with  which  rhetoricians  attacked 
philosophy.  Again,  in  the  latter  half  of  the  cen- 
tury, shams  and  humbugs  became  very  frequent. 
Just  as  many  a  sturdy  beggar  in  the  Middle  Ages 
donned  the  cowl  of  the  begging  friar,  many  an  idle 
vagabond  and  profligate  called  himself  a  Stoic,  and 
brought  discredit  upon  the  name.*  And  even  in 
higher  circles  there  often  seemed  the  greatest  in- 
consistency between  the  professions  and  the  prac- 
tice of  the  philosopher.  It  often  seemed  that 
while  the  Stoic  disdained  to  help  his  fellow  men, 
he  had  a  keen  eye  for  his  own  profit.  We  may 
be  sure  that  the  career  of  Seneca  evoked  from  his 
contemporaries   the   same   sarcasms  with  which 

*  See  Tac.  Ann.  16.  32,  for  Egnatius,  a  hypocrite  of  this  class, 
and  Grant,  Ethics  1. 281 ;  Lightfoot,  Ep.  to  Philippians,  p.  284. 


UNPOPULARITY  OF  STOICISM.  31 

Macaulay  has  treated  it.  "  The  business  of  a  philo- 
sopher was  to  declaim  in  praise  of  poverty  with 
two  millions  sterling  out  at  usury :  to  meditate 
epigrammatic  conceits  about  the  evils  of  luxury  in 
gardens  which  moved  the  envy  of  sovereigns ;  to 
rant  about  liberty,  while  fawning  on  the  insolent 
and  pampered  freedmen  of  a  tyrant ;  to  celebrate 
the  divine  beauty  of  virtue  with  the  same  pen 
which  had  just  before  written  a  defence  of  the 
murder  of  a  mother  by  a  son."  Lastly,  the  sordid 
habits  and  ostentatious  disregard  of  the  amenities 
of  life  which  many  philosophers  affected,  must 
have  caused  disgust  and  aversion  in  ordinary 
society.  In  the  second  century  their  position 
seems  to  have  improved,  both  as  regards  the 
government  and  public  opinion. 

But  though  generally  unpopular,  the  philosopher 
was  by  no  means  an  outcast  from  society.  He 
was  generally  to  be  found  in  a  large  mansion, 
acting  almost  like  a  private  chaplain,  instructing 
in  ethics  those  who  wished  to  learn,  and  attending 
the  death-beds  of  members  of  the  family.  We 
are  particularly  told  that  Petronius  died  without  a 
word  of  philosophy  being  spoken  by  his  bedside ; 
and  in  his  romance  Trimalchio  directs  that  no  philo- 


32  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

sopher  is  to  be  allowed  to  approach  him  during  his 
last  illness.^  These  exceptions  shew  that  the  ser- 
vices of  philosophy  were  usually  enlisted  in  times 
of  trouble.  In  most  cases,  no  doubt,  it  was  only 
in  such  times  that  the  man  of  the  world  troubled 
himself  much  about  the  ideals  of  the  sage.  Momm- 
sen's  statement  that  the  chief  result  of  philosophy 
was  that  "  two  or  three  families  lived  on  frugal 
fare  to  please  the  Stoa,"  seems,  however,  to  be  too 
strong.  When  we  remember  the  numerous  lec- 
tures, public  and  private,  which  celebrated  philo- 
sophers gave  to  crowded  audiences,  the  often  im- 
portant position  held  by  confidential  philosophers 
at  court,  and  the  devoted  affection  which  students 
felt  towards  their  teachers,  as  Persius  for  Cornutus, 
we  must  admit  a  wider  influence  than  these  words 
imply,  at  least  in  the  latter  half  of  our  period. 
Stoicism,  in  fact,  held  up  the  torch  of  morality  in 
a  very  dark  age,  and  imperfect  as  it  was  both  in 
theory  and  practice,  it  testified  always  to  the  truth 
of  a  moral  ideal,  and  never  ceased  to  point  to  virtue 
as  the  one  object  of  life.  Such  a  creed,  though 
disregarded  by  the  many,  can  never  exist  in  vain. 
Society  feels  its  influence  even  while  it  scorns  its 
professors. 


(    33    ) 


CHAPTER  IIL 


MORALITY. 

The  subject  of  Morality,  when  treated,  as  we  shall 
treat  it,  exclusively  from  the  point  of  view  of  the 
social  historian,  divides  itself  naturally  into  three 
sections,  Integrity,  Humanity,  and  Purity.  These 
simple  headings  seem  to  cover  nearly  all  the  topics 
which  belong  to  the  subject.  We  propose  to  take 
them  in  order,  endeavouring  in  each  case  to  come 
to  some  conclusion  as  to  the  state  of  public  opinion 
and  practice  at  the  period  with  which  we  are  con- 
cerned. The  first  two  sections  will  be  treated  with 
as  much  detail  as  shall  seem  necessary  to  arrive  at 
the  required  result ;  the  last  with  that  brevity  and 
reticence  which  the  nature  of  the  subject  demands. 
The  Romans  of  the  Republic  prided  themselves 
greatly  on  their  honesty  and  truthfulness.  They 
were  fond  of  contrasting  their  own  'fides'  with 
the  mendacity  of  the  Greeks  and  the  perfidy  of 
the  Phoenicians.    Their  annals  were  adorned  with 

c 


34  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

signal  examples  of  uprightness  and  fidelity,  which, 
though  to  a  great  extent  fictitious,  yet  shew  what 
kind  of  qualities  was  most  held  in  honour  at  the 
time.  The  incorruptible  Fabricius,  the  high- 
minded  Regulus,  the  frugal  Cincinnatus,  are  ex- 
amples of  what  Rome  considered  the  highest 
virtues  in  a  citizen.  The  high  estimation  in  which 
integrity  was  held  may  be  accounted  for  by  the 
early  development  of  commerce  in  regal  Rome  ;* 
and  the  defects  in  the  conception  of  it  which  we 
notice  by  the  still  narrow  sphere  in  which  contract 
worked.  The  claims  of  pietas  were  satisfied  by 
the  observance  of  stipulated  forms ;  and  we  hear 
of  gross  frauds  being  perpetrated  without  blame 
when  the  letter  of  the  obligation  was  not  violated. 
This  defective  conception  of  the  duty  of  honesty 
would  not  be  worth  mentioning  here  if  it  had  been 
a  mere  rudimentary  stage  in  the  development  of 
contract ;  but  it  continued  to  shew  itself  in  the 
dealings  of  Rome  with  foreign  nations  throughout 
her  history,  and  to  a  less  extent  in  those  between 
private  citizens.  Integrity  was  respected,  but,  like 
other  virtues,  less  for  its  own  sake  than  as  a  law  to 
be  observed. 

*  See  Golchvin  Smith's  Essay  on  this  subject. 


INTEGRITY.  35 


Before  the  end  of  the  Republic  even  this  narrow 
morality  had  nearly  ceased  to  be  observed.  Pas- 
sionate love  of  money  had  overcome  all  respect  for 
right  and  justice.  We  are  startled  by  the  univer- 
sal corruption,  the  perjuries,  forgeries,  and  other 
crimes  committed  for  the  sake  of  profit.  Nor  is 
much  improvement  visible  after  the  beginning  of 
our  period.  Perhaps  there  were  fewer  opportuni- 
ties for  crimes  on  a  large  scale  than  under  the 
republic;  but  Juvenal,  Tacitus,  Seneca,  and  other 
writers,  give  a  very  gloomy  picture  of  the  unscru- 
pulousness  of  society  in  money  matters.  As  usual, 
the  higher  classes  were  probably  the  worst,  but  we 
hear  complaints  of  the  frequent  dishonesty  of  trades- 
men, and  occasionally  of  great  corruption  in  the 
middle  class.  The  difficulty  of  making  money  by 
honest  means,  and  the  extravagant  mode  of  life 
practised  at  Rome,  gave  a  great  stimulus  both  to 
legacy-hunting  and  forgery  throughout  society. 
The  former  of  these  was  carried  to  such  an  extent 
that  it  is  necessary  to  say  a  little  about  it.  "  Cap- 
tatio,"  or  the  pursuit  of  inheritances,  became  a 
regular  art  at  Rome,  with  established  rules  and 
methods.  Persons  existed  who  made  it  the  one 
business  of  their  lives  to    court    some   wealthy 

C  2 


36  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

bachelor ;  to  humour  his  fancies,  praise  his  poetry, 
run  his  errands,  make  him  presents,  pray  for  his 
health  and  safety,  and  wait  anxiously  for  his 
death.  It  was  almost  the  only  profession  in  which 
competition  was  keen  and  constant,  and  it  appears 
to  have  been  brought  to  great  perfection.  No 
means  were  thought  degrading  that  could  gain  the 
wished-for  end.  The  height  of  ingenuity  was, 
perhaps,  reached  when  the  captator  made  a  will  of 
his  own  in  favour  of  the  rich  old  "  orbus,"  and 
casually  allowed  him  to  see  it.  "  Captatoria 
legata  "  had  to  be  forbidden  by  law.  The  exist- 
ence of  this  contemptible  class  of  men  testifies  to 
some  of  the  worst  evils  of  Roman  society.  The 
idleness  of  the  citizens,  their  extravagance  and 
luxury,  their  insatiable  greed  of  money,  above  all, 
their  habit  of  vicious  celibacy,  all  contributed  to 
make  the  odious  figure  of  the  captator  so  pro- 
minent in  society.  Pliny*  laments  the  dege- 
neracy of  his  age  in  becoming  terms.  "  Since 
senators  and  judges  (he  says)  came  to  be  chosen 
by  their  income,  and  magistrates  and  generals 
came  to  regard  money  as  their  chief  title  to  dis- 
tinction ;  since  childlessness  came  to  exercise  the 

*  Plin.  H.  N.  14.  5. 


"CAPTATION  37 


greatest  authority  and  power,  and  legacy-hunting 
to  be  the  most  lucrative  profession,  all  the  noble 
pursuits  of  life  and  liberal  arts  have  fallen  to  the 
ground,  and  servitude  alone  is  profitable.  In 
various  ways  all  men  care  for  money,  and  for 
money  alone :  even  distinguished  men  prefer  to 
cultivate  the  faults  of  others  rather  than  their  own 
virtues."  "  The  whole  town,"  says  Petronius,  "is 
divided  into  those  who  throw  the  bait  and  those 
who  take  it.  No  one  acknowledges  children  ;  for 
the  man  who  has  heirs  is  never  invited  to  any 
festive  gathering,  but  is  left  to  associate  with  the 
dregs  of  society.  On  the  other  hand,  the  childless 
man  is  covered  with  honours,  and  passes  for  a 
model  of  all  the  virtues.  Rome  is  like  a  field  out- 
side a  plague -stricken  city,  in  which  you  can  see 
nothing  but  carcases  and  crows  which  feed  upon 
them."  So  great  were  the  advantages  of  childless- 
ness that  Seneca  consoles  a  mother  who  had  just 
lost  her  only  son  by  reminding  her  of  the  greater 
consideration  she  will  now  enjoy.*  A  man  who 
married  was  regarded  as  hardly  in  his  senses. — 
"  Certe  sanus  eras  ?  Uxorem,  Postume,  ducis  ?" 
The  captator,  however,  was  sometimes  tired  of 

*  See  also  Tac.  A.  3.  25,  prsevalida  orbitate. 


138  0  9  8 


38  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

waiting,  and  after  his  fond  prayers  for  his  patron's 
recovery  had  been  unfortunately  granted,  he  would 
sometimes  call  in  a  venefica  to  hasten  his  posses- 
sion of  the  inheritance,  or  in  another  case  to  remove 
the  remaining  heir.  Or  if,  as  very  often  happened, 
the  vulture  was  baulked  of  his  prey,  and  the  in- 
heritance left  to  a  rival  or  a  more  worthy  recipient, 
the  rejected  flatterer  might  still  make  himself  rich 
and  happy  by  means  of  a  small  tablet  and  mois- 
tened signet.*  It  is  impossible  to  explain  away 
the  frequent  notices  of  these  crimes,  and  the 
evidence  they  afford  of  an  unscrupulous  and  cor- 
rupt spirit  in  society.  The  only  question  is  how 
far  it  extended.  We  would  fain  believe  that  in 
many  circles  honour  and  integrity  were  the  rule, 
and  this  belief  is  supported  by  some  works  of  the 
period,  e.g.,  the  letters  of  Pliny,  which  reveal  a 
high-minded  and  refined  tone  at  least  in  their 
author.  Again,  we  do  not  hear  much  of  dishonest 
contract-work,  or  fraudulent  adulterations,  the 
banes  of  modern  commerce ;  and  credit  seems  to 
have  been  fairly  good.  The  social  and  political 
differences  which  separated  classes  of  course  led  to 
recognised  unfairness  on  the  part  of  the  superior; 

*  Juv.  1.  67. 


HUMANITY.  39 


and  the  provinces  were  still  impoverished  by  un- 
equal trade  with  Roman  merchants.  This,  how- 
ever, was  in  process  of  improvement  owing  to  the 
extension  of  the  citizenship,  and  the  worst  injus- 
tices belong  to  the  end  of  the  republican  period. 
On  the  whole  it  appears  that  public  opinion  was 
decidedly  laxer  on  this  point  than  with  us,  and  that 
a  considerable  section,  especially  in  the  upper 
classes,  threw  self-respect  and  scruples  to  the 
winds,  and  pursued  wealth  with  a  cynical  disregard 
of  right  and  wrong,  such  as  is  not  often  exhibited 
openly  in  modern  times. 

The  subject  of  humanity  opens  questions  of 
deeper  interest,  and  demands  a  fuller  investigation. 
It  forms  indeed  one  of  the  most  important  branches 
of  our  subject.  We  shall  find  that  the  first  century 
made  substantial  contributions  to  the  progress  of 
humanity,  and  that  the  evidences  we  can  collect 
of  opinion  and  practice  on  this  head  are  full  of  in- 
terest and  significance  as  bearing  on  the  character 
of  social  life  at  Rome.  Cruelty  may  arise  from 
three  causes.  It  may  be  a  morbid  passion  which 
feeds  on  the  sight  of  suffering.  Men  who  are  free 
from  this  disease  may  act  cruelly  either  from 
callousness  or  from  vindictiveness,  of  which  the 


40  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

former  may  be  called  the  masculine,  the  latter  the 
feminine  type  of  cruelty.  The  cruelty  of  the 
Romans  belonged  to  the  first  class.  Vindictiveness 
was  not  one  of  their  national  faults.  When  they 
were  cruel,  they  were  so  from  defective  sensibility, 
which  failed  to  make  them  realise  the  feelings  and 
rights  of  their  victims.  This  arose  partly  from  a 
natural  bluntness  of  character,  partly  from  their 
narrow  conception  of  the  sphere  of  duty.  Neither 
religion  nor  sympathy  aroused  in  them  a  sense  of 
the  claims  of  aliens  and  dependents.  Conscience 
in  this  as  in  other  matters  seemed  the  slave  of 
positive  law.  The  life  of  a  prisoner,  the  land  of  a 
conquered  city,  were  forfeited  according  to  imme- 
morial law,  and  the  right  was  exercised  without 
scruple.  A  slave  was  a  chattel,  and  his  life  was 
therefore  of  no  value  after  he  had  ceased  to  be  of 
use  to  his  master.  A  debtor  was  made  over  by 
law  to  the  power  of  his  creditor,  and  mercy  was 
seldom  shewn  to  him.  The  whole  history  of 
Rome  under  the  Republic  is  full  of  instances 
of  what  may  be  truly  called  unfeeling  cruelty, 
of  barbarities  committed  in  cold  blood  and  with- 
out remorse,  as  if  the  Twelve  Tables  were  the 
highest  code   of  justice    and   injustice,  and   the 


NATURE  OF  ROMAN  CRUELTY.  41 

advantage  of  the  Republic  the  ultimate  test  of  right 
and  wrong. 

It  is  one  of  the  most  interesting  features  of  the 
period  we  are  now  considering  that  it  shews  many 
evidences  of  awakening  sensibility  in  this  matter. 
It  is  not  so  much  a  real  advance  in  morality,  as  an 
increase  in  the  sentiment  of  humanity.  We  find 
public  opinion  going  ahead  of  legislation,  demanding 
the  most  lenient  interpretation  of  the  law,  and 
sometimes  insisting  on  legal  right  being  waived  in 
the  interests  of  mercy.  This  tendency  is  espe- 
cially noticeable  in  the  case  of  slavery.  In  some 
other  matters,  such  as  the  gladiatorial  games,  the 
awakening  of  the  moral  sense  was  longer  deferred. 
For  we  trace  only  the  first  beginning  of  a  change 
in  public  opinion,  which  required  the  sanction  of  a 
new  religion  to  complete  its  development. 

Let  us  pass  in  review  the  chief  objects  on  which 
humanity  may  be  practised,  and  see  how  the 
Romans  of  the  first  century  dealt  with  them.  To 
take  first  the  case  of  slavery.  There  are  several 
indications  that  in  spite  of  the  enormous  increase 
in  the  number  of  slaves,  their  condition  was  better 
under  the  empire  than  under  the  Republic.  We 
seldom  hear  of  the  seditions  and  revolts  which 


42  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

endangered  the  state  in  the  first  and  second  cen- 
turies before  Christ.  The  literature  of  the  period 
gives  several  examples  both  of  sincere  and  delicate 
friendship  of  the  master  towards  the  slaves,  and  of 
devotion  and  attachment  of  the  slave  to  his 
master.  Seneca  insists  strongly  on  the  inherent 
equality  of  the  master  and  his  slaves,  and  entreats 
masters  to  consider  "  not  how  much  the  slave  can 
be  made  to  suffer  with  impunity,  but  how  much 
the  nature  of  right  and  justice  permits.  How 
much  juster  is  it,"  he  exclaims,  "  to  treat  men  of 
noble  mind  and  high  character  not  as  slaves,  but 
as  inferiors  in  social  rank,  to  whom  you  stand  in 
the  position  of  protector  not  of  owner.  There  are 
some  things  which  the  law  permits,  but  which 
justice  forbids  to  be  done."  Here  we  have  an 
explicit  recognition  of  extra-legal  duty.  Much  of 
the  credit  of  this  improvement  in  feeling  belongs 
to  Stoicism,  which  preached  the  brotherhood  of 
mankind  with  great  persistency.  It  even  suc- 
ceeded in  gaining  for  the  slave-class  several  im- 
portant legislative  enactments,  some  of  which  fall 
within  our  period,  others  in  the  second  century. 
Augustus,  though  he  was  himself  guilty  of  the 
murder  of  a  slave  for  killing  a   favourite  quail, 


ADVANCE  IN  PUBLIC  OPINION.  43 

shewed  his  disapproval  of  atrocious  cruelty  by 
masters  at  least  on  one  occasion.  The  anecdote, 
which  supplies  about  the  worst  instance  on 
record  of  Roman  cruelty  to  slaves,  is  well-known. 
Vedius  Pollio  was  about  to  throw  a  slave  into  his 
fish-pond  to  feed  his  lampreys,  because  he  had 
broken  a  crystal  cup.  Augustus,  as  a  punishment, 
ordered  all  the  vessels  in  the  house  to  be  broken, 
and  the  pond  to  be  filled  up.  The  Lex  Petronia, 
which  forbade  slaves  to  be  exposed  to  fight  with 
wild  beasts  without  the  sanction  of  a  judex,  is 
commonly  placed  in  this  reign.  But  the  cause 
of  mercy  gained  greater  successes  under  the  later 
Caesars.  Claudius  forbade  the  exposition  of  sickly 
or  infirm  slaves  on  an  island  of  the  Tiber,  and 
decreed,  according  to  Suetonius,  that  those  who 
killed  their  slaves  instead  of  exposing  them  should 
be  held  guilty  of  murder  (caedes),  an  ambiguous 
expression,  for  we  cannot  suppose  that  the  offence  i 
was  regarded  in  the  same  light  as  the  murder  of  a 
free  man.  In  fact,  the  power  of  life  and  death 
was  not  even  limited  till  the  reign  of  Antoninus. 
Nero  appointed  a  judge  to  protect  slaves  from 
cruelty  and  outrage,  a  great  step,  if  the  law 
was  honestly  carried  out.    Domitian  forbade  the 


44  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

mutilation  of  slaves.  The  torture  of  slaves  to 
extract  evidence  was  about  this  time  restricted, 
and  seems  to  have  become  uncommon.  The 
social  position  of  the  slave  seems  not  quite  so 
degraded  as  in  the  previous  age.  He  appears 
more  frequently  in  the  educated  professions,  and 
is  apparently  allowed  more  liberty  of  action  in 
the  disposal  of  his  time.  It  is  common  to  allow 
him  to  purchase  his  freedom  out  of  his  savings, 
and  if  he  is  manumitted  as  a  favour,  he  is  gene- 
rally allowed  to  retain  his  peculium.  Manumission 
comes  to  be  regarded  as  a  regular  reward  of 
faithful  service,  and  complaints  are  made  of  the 
dangerous  extent  to  which  it  is  practised.  Alto- 
gether, Roman  slavery  at  this  time  contrasts 
favourably  in  many  ways  with  the  negro  slavery 
of  some  Christian  nations.  We  do  not  forget  the 
darker  side  of  the  picture.  The  atrocious  execu- 
tion of  the  400  slaves  of  the  murdered  Pedanius 
in  the  reign  of  Nero,*  the  vengeance  provoked  by 
the  harshness  of  Larcius  Macedo  at  the  end  of 
the  century,!  the  frequent  murders  of  masters  by 
their    slaves,  $    the    frightful    picture    drawn    by 

*  Tac.  Ann.  14.  42-45.  f  Plin.  Ep.  3.  14. 

%  Sen.  Ep.  4.  8.    "  Non  pauciores  servorum  ira  cecidisse,  quam 
regum." 


IMPROVED  TREATMENT  OF  SLAVES.        45 

Juvenal  in  his  Sixth  Satire,  shew  that  a  fearful 
power  still  remained  in  the  master's  hands,  and 
that  not  a  few  abused  it  to  a  terrible  extent. 
These  horrors  were,  however,  we  believe,  the 
exception,  not  the  rule,  and  have  survived  simply 
as  being  exceptions.  Seneca  tells  us  that  masters 
who  ill-treated  their  slaves  were  pointed  at  in  the 
streets,*  and  the  tone  of  public  opinion  seems,  as 
we  said,  to  have  been  growing  more  humane 
throughout  the  first  century.  The  pride  of  race 
was  diminishing,  and  the  minds  of  the  privileged 
class  were  becoming  more  open  to  the  claims  of 
aliens  and  dependents.  The  slaves  had  still  much 
to  suffer,  and  their  condition  was  in  some  respects 
a  very  miserable  one,  but  the  voice  of  humanity 
had  made  itself  heard,  and  the  reform,  which 
dates  from  the  first  century,  extended  steadily  till 
the  evil  plant  was  uprooted  from  the  soil  of 
Europe. 

Humanity  to  criminals  is  generally  a  late  pro- 
duct of  civilisation.  The  Romans,  however,  were 
distinguished  by  the  leniency  of  their  punishments 
where  citizens  were  the  guilty  parties.  At  a  time 
when  slaves  might  be  put  to  a  terrible  death  for 

*  Sen.  de  Clem.  1.  18. 


46  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

the  slightest  offences,  the  gravest  crime  in  a  Roman 
was  seldom  punished  except  by  banishment.  The 
barbarous  penalties  of  the  Twelve  Tables  had  long 
fallen  into  desuetude,  and  if  we  except  the  cruelties 
of  some  of  the  emperors, — the  natural  product  of 
despotic  power, — the  Romans  cannot  be  accused 
of  over-severity  to  delinquents  within  their  own 
pale  A  few  instances  might  be  quoted  to  the 
contrary.  For  example,  the  horrid  story  of  the 
execution  of  the  children  of  Sejanus  displays 
strongly  the  old  Roman  callousness  mingled  with 
the  old  over -respect  for  legal  formality.  The 
burying  alive  of  a  Vestal  byDomitian  was  a  violent 
shock  to  the  feelings  of  the  age,  though  welcomed 
by  the  superstitious. 

This  is  perhaps  the  best  place  to  notice  what 
must  have  been  a  very  unpleasant  feature  in  Roman 
life — namely,  the  brutality  of  bullies  in  the  streets. 
If  we  may  believe  Juvenal  and  Apuleius,*  the  high 
roads  and  the  streets  of  Rome  were  rendered  un- 
safe for  the  defenceless  traveller ;  not  so  much  by 
the  assaults  of  professional  footpads,  as  by  fashion- 
able routs  returning  from  their  nocturnal  revels. 

*  See  also  Plin.  13.  43  ;  Dion.  61.  9  ;  Suet.  Nero  26  ;  Tac.  Ann. 
13.  25.  47  ;  with  Juv.  3.  275,  &c. ;  Apul.  Met.  2.  18. 


STREET-BULLIES.  47 

These  young  blades  used  to  patrol  the  streets  ac- 
companied by  a  gang  of  followers,  for  the  purpose 
of  insulting  and  beating  any  wayfarer  who  might 
be  unfortunate  enough  to  meet  them.  Their  ordi- 
nary mode  of  procedure,  according  to  Juvenal,  was 
to  accost  the  stranger  in  insulting  language,  and 
then  fall  upon  with  cudgels,  or  even  swords, 
so  that  he  might  think  himself  happy  if  he  escaped 
with  a  few  teeth  still  in  his  head.  Sometimes 
the  aggressors  were  not  content  even  with  this, 
but  accused  their  victim  next  day  of  having  as- 
saulted them.  These  roisterers,  who  went  to  bed 
in  dejection  if  they  had  beaten  no  one  that  night, 
were  often  men  of  good  position,  who  adopted 
this  extraordinary  means  of  amusing  themselves. 
The  phenomenon  has  not  been  unknown  in 
European  capitals  in  modern  times.*  Nero  was 
the  model  of  these  "  grassatores,"  and  Otho  one  of 
his  chief  companions.  Apuleius  gives  a  very  similar 
account  of  the  state  of  the  high-roads  in  the  pro- 
vinces. A  countryman  is  riding  on  his  donkey 
along  a  high  road  in  Macedonia.  A  legionary 
soldier    meets    him,    assaults    him    without    any 

*  The  "  Mohocks  "  of  the  last  century  in  London  will  suggest 
themselves  as  a  parallel.    See  also  Demosthenes  in  Oononem. 


48  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

pretext,  and  only  leaves  off  beating  him  when 
he  feigns  to  be  dead.  The  next  day  he  brings 
a  charge  against  the  unhappy  man  for  stealing, 
and  succeeds  in  having  him  led  off  to  execution. 
This  is  doubtless  an  exaggerated  story,  but  we 
have  strong  testimony  to  the  existence  of  such 
brutality  to  strangers  and  inferiors,  and  from 
the  number  of  references  to  it,  it  appears  to  have 
been  very  common.  From  the  point  of  view  of 
our  present  chapter  it  illustrates  the  evil  of  harsh 
social  distinctions,  which  obliterate  the  feelings  of 
social  duties.  It  brings  home  to  us  with  great 
force  the  unpleasant  position  of  the  weak  and  un- 
protected in  Roman  society,  when  we  hear  of 
aggravated  assaults,  sometimes  causing  death,  being 
committed  with  impunity.  The  rich  could  defend 
themselves  by  the  help  of  their  clients  and  slaves ; 
the  poor,  unless  they  could  attach  themselves  to 
some  powerful  protector,  were  in  constant  danger 
of  insult  and  outrage.  To  use  a  common  modern 
phrase,  there  was  practically  one  law  for  the  strong, 
another  for  the  weak. 

The  relief  of  the  poor,  the  suffering,  and  the  un- 
fortunate, is  another  important  branch  of  humanity. 
On  this  point  we  are  struck  by  the  very  large  pro- 


THE  ST  A  TE  DOLE.  49 

portion  of  the  population  of  Rome  whose  fortune 
or  misfortune  it  was  "  aliena  vivere  quadra."  Be- 
sides the  unknown  multitudes  of  slaves,  and  the 
very  considerable  number  of  clients,  hangers-on, 
and  parasites,  not  less  than  200,000  persons  were  j 
dependent  on  the  State  for  their  daily  food.  Only  | 
a  very  small  minority  of  the  inhabitants  can  have 
paid  for  their  own  board.  This  fact  marks  a  great 
difference  between  Rome  and  modern  cities,  and 
explains  why  "charity"  there  played  so  much 
less  a  part  than  in  modem  times.  We  cannot 
dignify  with  that  honourable  name  the  gratuitous 
distribution  of  corn,  which  carried  with  it  all  the 
evils  of  almsgiving  without  the  advantages  :  like 
the  rest  of  Imperial  munificence,  baths,  libraries, 
games,  &c,  it  was  a  mere  political  device,  which 
reduced  indeed  the  want  of  private  benevolence, 
but  was  itself  of  a  different  nature.  The  same  may 
be  said  of  land-distributions,  which  were  made 
occasionally  in  our  period  ;  nor  were  the  legacies 
which  some  princes  left  to  the  people  evidences 
of  genuine  benevolence.*    A  movement  for  the 

*  We  may  seem  here  to  do  scant  justice  to  the  noble  municipal 
patriotism  which  left  such  splendid  monuments  of  itself  over  the 
whole  empire.  But  this  is  not  humanity,  but  a  different  virtue, 
which  may  more  fitly  receive  its  recognition  in  another  chapter. 

D 


50  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

education  of  poor  children  deserves  more  praise. 
It  was  begun  by  Vespasian,  extended  by  Nerva, 
and  carried  on  by  his  successors.  Besides  the 
action  of  the  State,  it  became  common  for  wealthy 
men  to  found  charities  in  their  native  towns  for 
the  free  education  of  the  poor.  Pliny  conferred 
this  benefit  on  the  town  of  Comum.  Hospitals 
were  however  unknown,  so  far  as  we  can  tell,  and 
there  is  no  trace  of  lunatic  asylums.  The  insane 
were  not  illtreated,  as  in  England  till  the  present 
century,  but  were  attended  by  ordinary  physicians. 
Private  misfortunes  were  relieved  by  the  generosity 
of  friends.  The  liberality  which  was  often  dis- 
played in  these  cases  is  remarkable,  and  forms  a 
pleasing  feature  in  Roman  life.  If  a  man's  house 
was  burnt  down,  he  was  loaded  with  gifts  of  all 
kinds  from  his  neighbours,  so  that  he  might  even 
be  a  gainer  by  the  misfortune.*  The  presents 
might  not  be  altogether  disinterested,  and  the  poor 
man  might  find  no  one  to  help  him  in  a  similar 
disaster,  but  on  the  whole  a  good  deal  of  generosity 
seems  to  have  been  practised  at  Rome.f  When  the 

*  Juv.  3.  222. 

f  Polybius  indeed  says,  that  "  at  Rome  no  one  ever  gives  any- 
thing to  anybody; "  but  this  is  hardly  borne  out  by  other  evidence, 
at  least  in  our  period. 


PAGAN  CHARITY.  61 

amphitheatre  at  Fidena  fell,  and  killed  and  wounded 
an  enormous  number  of  persons,  the  houses  of  the 
rich  were  thrown  open  to  admit  the  sufferers,  and 
surgeons  and  remedies  supplied  them  free  of  cost.* 
Such  instances  seem  to  shew  that  "charity,"  though 
not  exalted  to  so  high  a  place  as  in  Christian 
times,  was  by  no  means  defective  under  the  early 
Emperors. 

The  enemies  of  the  Roman  people  were  still 
treated  with  rigour,  when  occasion  offered.  The 
siege  and  capture  of  Jerusalem  by  Titus  was  per- 
haps the  most  murderous  of  Roman  victories.  On 
the  other  hand,  Claudius  treated  the  captured 
Caractacus  with  a  magnanimity  which  had  not 
been  shewn  in  former  days  to  Vercingetorix  or 
Jugurtha.  But  the  foreign  wars  of  Rome  in  this 
period  were  comparatively  few  and  insignificant,  and 
we  have  not  sufficient  means  of  judging  whether 
the  duty  of  clemency  to  the  conquered  was  more 
recognized  than  in  the  republican  age. 

Let  us  pass  on  for  a  few  moments  to  another 
branch  of  humanity  (if  the  word  may  be  extended 
so  far),  namely,  kindness  to  animals.  The  indif- 
ference of  the  southern  nations  of  Europe  to  the 

*  Tac.  Ann.  4.  63. 
D  2 


52  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

sufferings  of  animals  at  the  present  day  is  well 
known.  We  may  assert  with  confidence  that 
Pagan  Rome  was  considerably  in  advance  of  modern 
Italy  in  this  respect.  It  would  be  unsafe  to  insist 
too  much  on  the  affection  of  the  Roman  for  his 
pets,  of  which  we  have  several  curious  examples  ;* 
but  we  find  cases  of  legislation,  such  as  the  ancient 
law  forbidding  on  pain  of  death  the  slaughter  of 
the  ox,f  and  cases  such  as  the  capital  punishment 
of  a  child  for  cruelty  to  birds,}  which  shew  how 
strong  was  the  feeling  on  the  subject.  Mr.  Lecky§ 
'-  quotes  or  refers  to  some  interesting  passages 
from  Ovid,  Plutarch,  Lucretius,  and  Juvenal, 
illustrative  of  the  same  feeling.  We  even  find 
persons  refusing  to  hunt  or  to  eat  meat  for  conscien- 
tious reasons.  This  pleasing  feature  in  Roman  life, 
which  contrasts  so  favourably  with  the  practice  of 
many  Christian  nations,  may  be  partly  attributed 
to  the  teaching  of  some  philosophers,  e.g.  the 
Pythagorean  schools,  which  held  the  doctrine  of 

*  For  Roman  pets,  cf .  Mart.  7. 87,  where  he  mentions  monkeys, 
ichneumons,  magpies,  and  snakes,  besides  the  more  ordinary 
animals. 

f  This  curious  law  was  common  to  most  of  the  nations  of 
antiquity.    We  find  it  at  Athens,  in  Phrygia,  and  in  other  places. 

%  Quint.  Instit.  5.  9. 

§  History  of  European  Morals,  voL  II.  p.  165. 


KINDNESS  TO  ANIMALS.  53 

the  transmigration  of  souls.  Stories  arising  from 
ignorance  of  natural  history  may  also,  as  Mr. 
Lecky  suggests,  have  aided  to  cause  the  convic- 
tion that  the  natures  of  men  and  animals  are 
identical.  We  can  only  be  surprised  that  no 
opposition  was  made  to  the  cruelties  of  the 
amphitheatre. 

We  have  deferred  till  now  the  subject  which  is 
generally  the  first  to  come  into  our  minds  when 
we  think  of  Roman  precept  or  practice  in  the 
matter  of  humanity.  The  very  important  part 
which  the  "  games "  of  the  amphitheatre  played 
in  the  social  life  of  Rome  has  been  recognized  by 
most  writers  on  the  subject.  There  is,  probably, 
no  feature  in  ancient  life  that  appears  to  the  modern 
mind  more  startling  than  that  throughout  the 
period  of  its  highest  civilisation  and  culture  one  of 
the  main  amusements  of  the  Roman  people  should 
have  been  the  spectacle  of  human  bloodshed.  We 
find  it  difficult  to  believe  that  men  who  could 
take  pleasure  in  such  a  spectacle  could  have  any 
feelings  of  humanity  at  all.  We  seem  to  be 
contemplating  the  lowest  abyss  to  which  human 
depravity  can  sink,  the  most  hideous  perver- 
sion of  all  the  kindly  sentiments  of  our  nature. 


SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 


To  contemplate  suffering  which  brings  no  ad- 
vantage to  the  beholder,  and  to  gloat  over  it 
for  its  own  sake,  may  seem  not  an  attribute 
of  men,  but  of  fiends.  The  possibility  of  such 
a  moral  disease  has  been  indignantly  denied  by 
many  writers  on  ethics,  from  Hobbes  down- 
wards. Selfishness,  they  say,  may  dry  up  the  milk 
of  human  kindness,  or  revenge  turn  it  to  gall,  but 
the  mere  sight  of  suffering,  in  the  absence  of  such 
motives,  can  never  be  otherwise  than  painful. 
We  believe  this  view  to  be  altogether  mistaken. 
In  the  happy  security  of  our  peaceful  civilisation 
there  may  exist  latent  elements  in  our  nature 
which  never  reveal  themselves  to  our  self-con- 
sciousness. The  truth  seems  to  be,  as  Professor 
Bain  says,  that  this  feeling  is  a  mode  of  sen- 
suous and  sensual  gratification,  which,  in  the  ab- 
sence of  countervailing  sympathies,  may  amount 
to  a  very  keen  sensation  of  pleasure,  and  by 
habitual  indulgence  may  produce  a  morbid  craving 
of  the  most  potent  kind.  In  boys  this  ten- 
dency often  shews  itself;  in  savages  it  is  almost 
universal,  and  produces  the  most  hideous  results ; 
in  civilised  men  it  is  generally  undeveloped  and 
scarcely  felt  to  exist  unless  called  out  by  ex- 


THE  "  GA MES  "  OF  THE  A  MPHITIIEA  THE.    55 

ceptional  circumstances.  At  Rome  the  gladia- 
torial shows  afforded  it  the  most  abundant  food. 
Even  the  holocausts  of  victims  slaughtered  on  the 
sacrificial  stone  of  the  Aztec  war-god  must  have 
been  less  demoralising  to  the  spectators  than  the 
Roman  games.  The  continual  succession  of  these 
barbarous  spectacles,  the  intense  enthusiasm  they 
excited,  and  the  absence  of  other  matters  of  in- 
terest which  might  divert  the  attention,  kept  the 
imagination  constantly  fixed  on  these  scenes  of 
torture  and  death.* 

The  measure  of  the  evil  wrought  by  the  games 
may  be  taken  by  the  neglect  of  the  higher  intel- 
lectual amusements  which  we  observe  at  this 
period.  The  drama  seemed  tasteless  and  insipid 
to  those  who  habitually  watched  the  enactment  of 
the  direct  tragedies  in  real  life.  The  eyes  that 
had  gloated  over  the  last  contortions  of  human 
agony,  the  ears  that  had  feasted  themselves  on  the 
shouts  and  groans  of  mortal  conflict,  could  never 
again  feel  much  interest  in  the  sight  of  blind 
CEdipus,  or  the  narration  of  Polyxena's  sacrifice  .f 
Even  comedy  had  lost  its  charms,  and  could  only 

*  Even  the  children  played  at  gladiators.     Epictetus  M.  29.  3. 
f  See  Tac.  Dial.  Or.  29,  where  he  laments  that  gladiators  and 
race-horses  had  left  no  room  for  noble  culture. 


56  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME 

attract  when  it  pandered  to  the  pruriency  which 
shared  with  thirst  for  blood  the  polluted  minds  of 
the  populace.  The  gorgeous  processions  which 
had  been  so  popular  in  the  republican  days  were 
now  regarded  with  impatience.*  At  last  even 
the  games  themselves  were  not  sufficient  to  satisfy 
the  morbid  craving,  unless  they  were  varied  by 
constant  novelties  in  slaughter,  often  consisting  of 
more  wholesale  bloodshed,  or  more  horrid  forms 
of  death.f 

In  spite  of  legislative  restrictions,  to  be  referred 
to  in  another  chapter,  the  number  of  victims  in- 
creased, till  in  the  reign  of  Trajan  we  read  of 
10,000  gladiators  being  exposed  to  fight.  The 
combat  of  armed  men  was  varied  by  every  kind  of 
fantastic  device,  appealing  to  the  love  of  novelty 
in  the  spectators,  which  always  craved  for  some 
new  excitement.  The  combatants  were  armed  as 
Thracians,  as  Mirmillones,  as  Essedarii,  or  as 
Retiarii,  and  especial  interest  was  excited  by  a 

*  Seneca  closes  one  of  his  imaginary  harangues  by  saying,  "  Sed 
jam  non  sustineo  vos  morari.  Scio  quam  odiosa  sit  circensibus 
pompa."     Sen.  Controv.  1  praef.  ad  fin. 

f  Among  the  most  atrocious  slaughters  in  the  arena  during  this 
century  may  be  mentioned  that  of  the  British  prisoners  at  Rome 
under  Claudius  (Dion.  60.  30),  and  that  of  2,500  Jews  at  Caesarea 
in  A.D.  70. 


BARBARITY  OF  THE  SPECTATORS.         57 

struggle  between  two  different  sorts  of  equipment. 
Even  the  sense  of  the  ludicrous  was  appealed  to 
by  combats  of  blind-folded  men,*  of  dwarfs  and 
deformed  persons,f  while  there  are  several  in- 
stances on  record  of  women  descending  into  the 
arena.  This  last  atrocity  seems  to  have  disgusted 
even  the  depraved  taste  of  the  populace,  and  it  was 
eventually  forbidden.  The  deserts  of  Africa  and 
Asia  were  ransacked  for  every  kind  of  wild  beast 
that  could  be  made  to  fight  in  the  arena.  The 
excitement  of  the  spectators  during  the  combats 
was  intense,  and  shewed  itself  in  savage  shouts, 
such  as  "  Habet ! "  "  Accipe  ferrum ! "  "  Occide,  ure, 
verbera  ! "  "Quare  tarn  timide  incurrit  in  ferrum  ?  " 
"  Quare  parum  libenter  moritur  ?  "  J  By  a  cruel 
innovation  the  life  of  the  vanquished  gladiator  was 
made  to  depend  on  the  suffrages  of  the  crowd,  and 
attempts  were  even  made  to  introduce  games 
"  sine  missione,"  where  no  quarter  was  to  be  given. 
These  were,  however,  forbidden  by  Augustus. § 
The  general  practice  was  for  the  spectators  to 
express  their  wishes  as  to  the  fate  of  the  prostrate 
combatant  by  a  motion  of  the  thumb,  which  was 

♦  AndabatcE  Cic.  ad  Fam.  7.  10.  f  Stat.  Silv.  1.  57-64. 

%  Sen.  Ep.  7.  4.  §  Suet.  Aug.  45. 


58  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

turned  to  the  breast  to  indicate  the  death  thrust,  or 
moved  downwards  to  signify  the  dropping  of  the 
weapon.* 

We  have  no  right  to  wonder  that  this  pernicious 
institution  was  more  popular  than  even  the  bull- 
fights of  modern  Spain,  and  that  the  attraction 
was  so  strong  that  even  Christians  in  the  ardour 
of  their  newly-accepted  faith  often  failed  to  tear 
themselves  away  from  the  amphitheatre.!  We 
must  admit  that  no  element  of  excitement  and 
interest  was  wanting.  The  vast  assemblage  of 
human  beings,  all  intent  on  a  common  object, 
was  enough  in  itself  to  blunt  the  susceptibilities 
and  rouse  the  ardour  of  each  individual  spectator; 
the  magnificence  and  variety  of  the  entertainment 
dazzled  the  eye  and  kept  the  attention  con- 
stantly riveted ;  the  splendid  courage  with  which 
the  combatants  always  faced  wounds  and  death 
took  away  most  of  the  hideousness  which  usually 
attends  the  violent  extinction  of  human  life  ;  and 
the  spirit  of  partisanship,  which  is  necessary  to 
identify  the  spectator  with  the   scenes  he  wit- 

*  These  mute  gestures  were  often  accompanied  by  loud  shouts, 
"  dissono  clamore,"  Tac.  A.  1.  32.  Cf .  also  Suet.  CaL  80 ;  Mart 
Spect.  29.  3 ;  Fronto  ad  M.  Caes.  2.  4.  4. 

f  Cf.  Augustine,  Confess.  6.  8. 


POPULARITY  OF  THE  INSTITUTION.       59 

nesses,  was  excited  both  by  the  person  of  the 
gladiator  and  by  the  method  of  his  equipment 
and  fighting.*  When  we  add  to  these  attractions 
the  unhappy  psychological  phenomenon  which  we 
discussed  above,  we  have  an  ample  explanation  of 
the  strength  of  this  institution,  which  nothing  but 
Christianity  could  eradicate. 

We  are,  however,  disappointed  by  the  tone  of 
the  cultivated  classes  with  regard  to  the  games. 
We  find  very  few  traces  of  the  disgust  which  we 
should  have  expected  them  to  arouse  in  a  refined 
mind.  Such  as  there  are  belong  to  the  Empire, 
not  to  the  Republic,  which  bears  out  the  theory 
we  are  endeavouring  to  maintain,  that  a  great 
awakening  of  humanity  dates  from  the  first  cen- 
tury. Cicero,  indeed,  says  that  "some  consider 
the  games  cruel,  and  possibly  they  are  as  now 
conducted," f  and  in  another  place  declares  that 
he  feels  no  pleasure  in  seeing  a  feeble  man  torn 
by  a  powerful  beast,  or  a  noble  animal  transfixed 
by  a  spear 4  This  we  should  expect  in  a  man  of 
Cicero's    character,  but  his   aversion   is    one    of 

*  The  rivalry  between  the  supporters  of  the  large  and  small 
shield  was  very  keen  in  the  latter  half  of  our  century, 
f  Tusc.  2.  17. 
%  Ep.  ad  Div.  7.  1. 


60  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

taste  and  not  of  principle.*  After  the  Augustan 
age  a  slightly  better  tone  seems  to  prevail. 
Drusus  the  son  of  Tiberius,f  and  Claudius,}  are 
blamed  for  shewing  too  keen  a  pleasure  in  the 
sight  of  bloodshed.  Private  writers  no  longer  put 
forward  the  official  justification — that  the  sight  of 
strife  and  death  promotes  a  military  spirit  in  the 
citizens.  Literature  supplies  no  instance  of  a  dis- 
position to  gloat  over  the  horrors  of  the  arena ; 
and  Seneca  condemns  the  games  altogether,  with 
great  eloquence  and  vigour,  §  on  the  true  prin- 
ciples of  humanity.  But  though  other  indications 
of  awakening  conscience  might  be  quoted,  the 
record  during  the  first  century  is  on  the  whole 
disappointing,  and  shews  that  morality  had  as 
yet  made  little  progress  on  this  field.  We  may 
now  leave  this  painful  but  interesting  subject, 
the  importance  of  which  seemed  to  justify  a 
somewhat  lengthy  discussion. 

*  See  e.g.,  Tusc.  2.  20,  where  he  defends  the  games  as  conducive 
to  courage  and  contempt  of  death. 

f  Tac.  Ann.  1.  76. 

%  Suet.  Claud. 

§  Nothing  could  be  more  finely  expressed  than  his  answer  to 
the  common  plea  that  the  sufferers  were  criminals.  "  They  de- 
serve to  die,  I  know ;  but  what  crime  have  you  committed  to 
deserve  to  be  a  spectator  of  their  punishment  1 " 


SEXUAL  MORALITY.  61 

The  third  branch  of  morality  which  we  have  to 
discuss  is  that  connected  with  the  relations  be- 
tween the  sexes.  The  points  to  be  considered  are : 
first,  the  extent  and  causes  of  the  degradation  of 
public  morals  in  this  particular,  and,  secondly,  the 
movement  of  public  opinion  on  the  subject  during 
the  first  century.  The  Romans  of  the  early  re- 
public justly  prided  themselves  ^on  the  purity  of 
their  domestic  life,  which  enabled  them  to  allow 
great  freedom  to  their  women,  and  made  divorce 
an  unknown  thing.  Though  the  legal  position  of 
the  wife,  as  of  the  son,  was  low,  women  enjoyed 
great  respect  and  influence,  and  the  organism  of 
domestic  life  was  sound  and  healthy.  This 
pleasing  state  of  things  was  changed  by  the  ex- 
tension of  the  empire^  A  wave  of  corruption 
swept  over  Rome  with  the  influx  of  Oriental 
wealth  and  Oriental  slaves,  the  slaves  especially 
being  a  fruitful  source  of  vice,  as  they  always  are 
where  the  institution  exists.  The  civil  war,  which 
ended  with  the  battle  of  Actium,  completed  the 
dissolution  of  morals,  and  opened  a  period  perhaps 
unparallelled  in  history  for  unblushing  debauchery 
and  shameless  wickedness.  The  plague  fed  on  its 
own  contamination.    Literature  spread  corruption  I 


62  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

through  all  classes  by  the  audacity  of  its  coarse- 
ness. The  theatre  owed  its  chief  attraction  to  the 
manner  in  which  it  pandered  to  the  vilest  tastes. 
Art  lent  itself  to  depict  shameless  and  suggestive 
scenes.  Even  religion  became  the  ready  minister  of 
vice  ;  and  the  temples  of  Isis  were  constantly  used 
for  the  vilest  purposes.*  The  women,  as  is  usually 
the  case  when  society  is  thoroughly  corrupt,  were 
even  more  depraved  than  the  men.  Abnormal 
forms  of  vice  were  as  common  in  Rome  as  ever  in 
Greece.  The  court  often  set  the  example  of  the 
most  hideous  profligacy.  It  is  unnecessary  to 
heighten  the  colours  of  the  dreadful  picture  by 
references  to  Juvenal,  Martial,  or  Suetonius.  It  is 
needful  to  keep  in  mind  this  melancholy  feature  of 
Roman  life,  but  no  excuse  is  wanted  for  not 
allowing  it  its  due  proportion  of  space  in  an  essay 
of  this  kind.  Without  further  details,  then,  let  us 
state  that  the  Empire  found  the  whole  of  society 
pervaded  with  the  grossest  immorality,  that  mar- 
riage was  avoided  to  an  extent  which  threatened 
the  extinction  of  the  Roman  stock,  that  divorce 
was  practised  with  a  scandalous  levity  and  fre- 

*  Cf.  the  story  of  Decius  Mundus,  in  the  reign  of  Tiberius. 
The  strong  expressions  of  Minucius  Felix,  quoted  by  Friedlander, 
6hew  that  the  evil  still  existed  in  the  third  century. 


DEPRAVITY  OF  THE  AGE.  63 


>quency,  that  even  military  discipline  and  the 
frugality  of  a  country  life  had  ceased  to  exercise 
their  wholesome  influence  on  society,  that  religion 
was  either  silent  or  enlisted  in  the  service  of  vice, 
and  that  belief  in  purity  seemed  to  have  almost 
vanished  from  the  earth.  It  will  be  a  more  plea- 
sing task  to  consider  what  deductions  can  be  made 
from  this  gloomy  indictment,  and  what  hopes  for 
the  future  were  discernible  in  the  darkness  of 
Pagan  wickedness. 

In  the  first  place  the  whole  empire  was  not 
nearly  so  corrupt  as  the  capital.  The  valley  of 
the  Po  still  contained  a  free  agricultural  and 
industrial  population,  whose  business  or  sim- 
plicity preserved  their  virtue  from  contamination. 
The  great  towns  of  the  East,  such  as  Antioch 
and  Alexandria,  were  the  imitators  or  instructors 
of  Rome  in  the  worst  excesses;  but  we  would 
gladly  believe  that  the  western  provinces,  and  the 
rural  districts  of  the  empire  generally,  were  stran- 
gers to  the  worst  fruits  of  luxury.  Again,  we  are 
pleased  to  find  that  as  the  barbarities  of  the  slave- 
owner did  not  quench  the  spirit  of  loyalty  and 
fidelity  in  the  slaves,  so  the  laxity  of  morals  in 
both  sexes  did  not  banish  from  society  the  do- 


64  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

mestic  virtues  of  conjugal  devotion.  It  was 
remarked  by  Velleius  Paterculus*  that  the  evil 
period  of  the  civil  wars  was  brightened  by  signal 
examples  of  devotion  of  slaves  to  their  masters, 
and  still  more  of  wives  to  their  husbands,  while  the 
bonds  of  filial  duty  seemed  to  have  been  altogether 
broken.  And  the  early  empire  can  furnish  as 
signal  examples  of  fidelity  as  the  end  of  the  re- 
public. The  courage  of  Porcia,  the  wife  of  Brutus, 
is  not  more  admirable  than  the  devotion  of  the 
two  Arrias,  mother  and  daughter,  to  their  hus- 
bands.f  The  epitaphs  of  the  period  shew  that 
the  old  ideal  of  womanhood  was  not  yet  extinct. 
Many  Roman  matrons,  if  we  may  trust  the  inscrip- 
tions on  their  sepulchres,  still  followed  the  simple 
rule  of  old  times,  "  domi  mansit,  lanam  fecit,"  and 
many  were  able  to  take  the  still  prized  title  of 
"  Univira."  There  is  another  consideration  which 
has  not  been  urged  by  other  writers  on  the  subject, 
but  which  may  well  make  us  pause  before  accept- 
ing too  readily  the  pictur2s  drawn  by  satirists  like 
Juvenal,  profligates  like   Martial,  pessimists  like 

*  Veil.  2.  67. 

f  Fannia,  the  daughter  of  the  younger  Arrias,  and  wife  of 
Helvidius  Priscus,  shewed  herself  worthy  of  her  mother  and 
grandmother.    Plan.  Ep.  7.  19. 


EVIDENCE  FROM  LITERA  TURE.  65 

Tacitus,  and  scandal-mongers  like  Suetonius.  We 
mean  the  purity  and  delicacy  of  some  of  the  pro- 
minent writers  of  the  age.  To  go  back  a  little, 
as  we  may,  Cicero,  though  often  foul-mouthed  in 
invective,  was  evidently  a  moral  man;  Virgil  is 
conspicuous  among  the  writers  of  all  ages  for  his 
purity ;  Pliny  the  Younger  shews  all  the  reticence 
and  delicacy  of  the  modern  gentleman;  Seneca, 
Epictetus,  and  Plutarch  urge  strongly  the  obliga- 
tion of  chastity  in  the  husband  as  well  as  the 
wife ;  and  many  other  instances  might  be  quoted 
to  shew  that  the  corruption  was  not  by  any 
means  universal.  These  are  the  chief  arguments 
we  can  find  to  oppose  to  the  fearful  array 
of  evidence  against  the  morality  of  Imperial 
Rome.  It  must  be  confessed  that  they  make 
but  a  poor  show.  We  may  hope  that  civiliza- 
tion will  never  again  sink  into  so  deep  a  degra- 
dation. 

It  remains  to  consider  whether  in  this  as  in 
other  branches  of  morality,  the  first  century 
kindled  the  life-giving  spark  which  was  to  burn 
so  brightly  afterwards.  We  have  just  mentioned 
the  noble  teaching  of  Seneca  and  Plutarch  on 
the    duty  of  chastity.    Still    more  Christian   in 

E 


66  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

tone  are  the  precepts  of  Musonius  Rufus,  who 
condemned  all  illicit  intercourse  either  in  or  out 
of  wedlock,  and  taught  that  "  the  virtues  of 
men  and  women  are  the  same."  This,  which 
had  never  been  inculcated  by  the  older  Stoics, 
seems  a  forecast  of  the  ascetic  notion  of  purity 
which  was  developed  by  Christianity.  We  find 
many  instances  of  it  in  the  next  century  out- 
side the  pale  of  Christianity,  but  scarcely  any 
other  indications  of  it  in  our  period.*  We  do, 
however,  trace  some  desire  for  moral  reform  in 
this  as  in  other  respects  towards  the  close  of  the 
century.  It  never  reached  boiling  point,  but  "sim- 
mered gently  on  the  surface  of  society,"  f  and  did 
something  to  check  the  extravagance  and  osten- 
tation of  vice  which  is  so  painful  a  feature  of 
the  age. 

We  purpose  to  conclude  this  chapter  by  a  few 
remarks  on  what  we  have  learnt  to  call  the 
sanctity  of  human  life,  as  understood  at  Rome. 

*  Epictetus,  however,  regards  celibacy  as  a  higher  state  than 
marriage.  This  view,  which  was  held  by  nearly  all  early  Christian 
writers,  is  quite  contrary  to  the  ordinary  ideas  of  antiquity,  and 
can  only  be  due  to  the  ascetic  notion  of  the  relations  between  the 
sexes. 

j-  Merivale. 


HOMICIDE.  67 


The  attitude  of  society  towards  murder,  infanti- 
cide, and  homicide  generally,  and  the  kindred 
question  of  suicide,  presents  some  points  of 
interest  which  should  not  be  passed  over.  To 
take  first  the  question  of  murder  of  adult  free 
persons.  There  is  much  evidence  to  prove  that 
domestic  crime,  was  extremely  common  in  this 
century.  \  Parricide,  perhaps  the  most  unnatural 
crime  of  all,  is  noticed  as  increasing  in  frequency. 
In  earlier  times  there  had  been  no  legislation  on 
the  subject,  the  crime  being  regarded  as  too 
horrible  to  be  committed.  Poisoning  of  husbands 
and  wives  was  apparently  carried  on  to  a  frightful 
extent.  We  need  only  refer  to  the  awful  revela- 
tion of  wickedness  in  Cicero's  speech  pro  Cluentio, 
and  to  Martial's  half- humorous  denunciations, 
e.g.,  Ep.  9,  15  : 

"  Inscripsit  tumulis  septem  scelerata  virorum 
'  Se  f  ecisse '  Cliloe  ;  quid  pote  simplicius  1 " 

the  literal  truth  of  which  may  be  doubted,  but  this 
does  not  affect  their  value  as  evidence.  Profes- 
sional poisoners,  such  as  Locusta,  found  plenty  of 
occupation  at  court  and  among  the  upper  classes. 
The  chief  motives  of  these  crimes  were  love  of 
money  and  adulterous  passion,  especially  the 
E  2 


68  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

former.  We  have  before  mentioned  the  baneful 
result  of  combined  luxury  and  idleness  on  the 
morals  of  the  aristocracy.  A  ruined  man  of  fashion, 
or  a  member  of  a  fallen  family,  had  no  means  of 
repairing  his  fortunes  except  by  legacy-hunting 
or  marrying  an  heiress,  and  the  temptation  to 
crime  in  the  frantic  pursuit  of  wealth  was  often 
irresistible.  Murders  by  the  criminal  classes,  in 
housebreaking  or  highway  robbery,  are  sometimes 
mentioned.  Assassination,  such  as  was  common  in 
Italy  in  the  15th  century,  was  never  a  Roman 
crime.  The  duel,  that  strangest  product  of  Chris- 
tian civilization,  was  absolutely  unknown.  It  was 
characteristic  of  the  Roman  temperament  to  dis- 
1  courage  personal  violence  in  redressing  private 
•  wrongs,  and  to  employ  legal  remedies  to  settle 
\  even  "  affairs  of  honour."  At  Rome,  as  in  England, 
slander  was  confuted  and  punished  not  at  the 
sword's  point,  but  by  the  verdict  of  a  court  of  jus- 
tice. The  ordinary  course  of  a  quarrel  in  high 
life  at  Rome  was  dignified  and  temperate.  Ger- 
manicus  sends  Piso  a  cartel — not  of  challenge  to 
mortal  combat,  but  to  inform  him  that  their 
acquaintance  and  friendship  must  cease.*    Tiberius 

*  Tac.  Ann.  2.  70,  and  3.  12. 


INFANTICIDE.  G9 


sends  a  similar  message  to  Labeo.*  Even  a  wager 
at  law  was  employed  in  cases  of  this  kind.  The 
case  of  slaves  has  already  been  dealt  with. 

To  take  next  the  cases  of  abortion  and  infanti- 
cide. The  former  it  appears  was  not  discouraged 
by  law,  and  was  very  extensively  practised.  The 
art  was  a  regular  part  of  the  physician's  practice, 
and  was  apparently  well  understood.!  We  find 
praises  of  women  for  not  resorting  to  it.  The 
destruction  of  a  new-born  infant  was  according  to 
some  authorities  forbidden  by  law,  but  it  was  cer- 
tainly common.^  Parents  whose  sense  of  pity 
prevented  them  from  killing  an  infant,  often 
exposed  it,  in  which  case  it  either  died  of  neglect 
or  was  reared  as  a  slave  or  prostitute  by  persons 
who  made  a  trade  of  the  practice.  The  habit  of 
"  limiting  the  number  of  children,"  as  Tacitus 
euphemistically  calls  it,  was  condemned  on  political 
grounds  as  tending  to  diminish  population  at  a 
time  when  the  human  harvest  was  bad ;  but  we  do 

*  Tac.  Ann.  6.  29.  The  emperor,  however,  speaks  of  "  reviving 
an  old  custom,"  so  perhaps  the  formality  was  nearly  obsolete  in 
our  period. 

f  See,  however,  Ovid.  "Saspe  suos  utero  quae  necat  ipsa 
perit." 

%  See  Sen.  de  Ira.  1.  15.  2.  "  Liberos  quoque,  si  debiles  mon- 
strosique  editi  sunt,  mergimua." 


70  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

not  find  the  moral  condemnation  which  modern 
society  passes  on  the  practice,  a  judgment  which 
is  due  to  a  new  conception  of  the  guilt  of  homi- 

i  tide,  introduced  by  Christianity.  The  practice  of 
infanticide  was  certainly  highly  mischievous  at 
Rome  in  this  period,  and  contributed  not  a  little 

|  to  the  gradual  extinction  of  the  Roman  race. 

The  kindred  subject  of  suicide  holds  an  extremely 
prominent  place  in  Roman  social  history,  especially 
in  our  period.  At  no  other  time  probably  has 
deliberate  withdrawal  from  life  been  so  common  as 
under  the  early  empire  at  Rome.  Men  committed 
suicide  to  escape  the  pains  of  mortal  disease,  or  to 
anticipate  condemnation  for  crime ;  many  resolved 
to  end  their  life  when  they  felt  old  age  coming 
upon  them ;  some  even  determined  to  accompany  a 
beloved  person  to  the  tomb.  The  resolution  was 
carried  out  with  a  calm  deliberation  which  distin- 
guishes Roman  suicides  from  the  rash  and  sudden 
acts  of  self-destruction  with  which  we  are  familiar. 
We  read  of  men  calmly  waiting  the  verdict  of  their 
physicians  on  their  chances  of  recovery  from  sick- 
ness, before  deciding  whether  to  live  or  die;  of 
others  fixing  a  day  to  end  their  lives,  and  notifying 
it  to  their  relations ;  of  others  choosing  a  lingering 


SUICIDE.  71 

form  of  death,  apparently  with  the  object  of  dying 
in  the  presence  of  their  friends.  Some  noble  men 
put  an  end  to  their  lives  in  despair  of  their  country, 
under  the  vile  tyranny  of  some  of  the  emperors ; 
one  man,  on  the  other  hand,  postponed  his  death 
till  after  the  assassination  of  Domitian,  that  he 
might  die  free.  Public  opinion  was  generally—"""* 
favourable  to  suicide.  Many  philosophers,  it  is 
true,  condemned  it  as  a  desertion  of  one's  post,  but 
the  general  feeling  was,  that  it  was  an  open  door 
through  which  man  might  escape  at  any  time  from 
the  woes  of  life,  and  that  he  had  a  perfect  right  to 
avail  themselves  of  it.  The  best  indication  of  the 
Roman  view  of  the  subject  is  that  given  by  Pliny,* 
when  he  says,  "  There  are  some  things  that  even 
God  cannot  do ;  for  he  cannot  seek  death  if  he 
wishes  it — that  best  of  gifts  which  he  has  given  to 
men  amid  all  the  miseries  of  life."  Seneca,  in  a 
burst  of  brilliant  eloquence,  enumerates  the  suffer- 
ings from  which  death  makes  us  free,  and  con- 
gratulates the  human  race  on  the  liberty  which  is 
thus  within  their  reach,  f  Many  distinguished 
Romans,  Musonius  Rufus,  Silius  Italicus,  Petronius, 

*  Plin.  H.  N.  2.  5. 

f  Sen.  Cons,  ad  Marciam,  20. 


1/ 


72  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

Otho  the  Emperor  *  among  them,  put  into  practice 
the  precepts  of  philosophers.  The  death  of  Cato 
became  a  commonplace  of  panegyric.  Regular 
epidemics  of  suicides  appeared  in  various  places. 
A  law  had  to  be  made  preventing  accused  persons 
saving  their__prop.erty  for  their  families  by  antici- 
pating their  sentence.  The  idea  of  life  being  sacred 
in  itself  was  quite  foreign  to  the  Roman  mind. 
Moralists  condemned  suicide,  when  they  did  so,  as 
desertion  or  cowardice,  but  not  as  murder.  The 
legislature  did  not  interfere  in  the  matter,  and 
philosophers  were  left  to  discuss  the  subject  calmly 
and  impartially.  As  we  have  seen,  they  were 
divided  on  the  question,  but  the  hardness  of  the 
Roman  temperament  predisposed  men  to  regard 
life  very  lightly,  and  the  arguments  from  patriotism 
and  personal  dignity  did  not  appeal  to  the  many. 
/Where  a  materialistic  view  of  life  prevails,  suicide 
is  naturally  looked  upon  as  reasonable  in  certain 
cases,  and  is  likely  to  be  common,  especially  among 
the  educated,  who  are  more  influenced  by  general 
ideas.  Christianity  has  certainly  increased  the 
seriousness  with  which  death  is  regarded,  and  this 

*  Other  suicides  in  the  first  century  were  Cocceius  Nerva,  under 
Tiberius,  Sextius  Severus,  Albucius  Silus,  Corellius  Rufus,  and 
Titius  Aristo. 


DANGER  OF  EXAGGERATION.  73 

fact  makes  it  rather  difficult  for  us  to  enter  into  the 
feelings  of  the  ancients  on  the  subject. 

We  have  now  concluded  our  brief  survey  of  the 
state  of  pagan  morality  at  Rome  during  the  first 
century.  It  is  in  most  respects  a  dark  picture, 
though  some  writers  have  painted  it  in  yet  blacker 
colours.  But  the  dictates  alike  of  feeling  and  of 
reason  forbid  us  to  believe  the  worst  accounts  that 
have  reached  us.  It  is  no  disparagement  of  the 
work  wrought  by  Christianity  to  hesitate  before 
accepting  evidence  which  would  argue  a  radical 
change  in  human  nature.  We  should  rather  rest 
assured  that  in  the  worst  times  virtue  has  never 
left  the  earth,  and  that  in  its  broad  features  human 
nature  is  the  same  for  good  and  evil  as  it  was  2,000 
years  ago.  The  testimony  of  an  age  against  itself  j 
is  always  overdrawn.  Let  us  correct  the  fierce  in- 
vective of  Juvenal  by  the  wise  warning  of  Seneca.* 
"  We  must  guard  against  letting  blame  fall  on  our 
own  age.  This  has  always  been  the  complaint  of 
our  ancestors,  that  manners  have  been  corrupted, 
that  vice  reigns,  that  human  life  is  deteriorating 
and  falling  into  every  kind  of  wickedness.  We 
lament  in  the  same  strain,  and  our  descendants 

*  De  Ben.  1.  10. 


SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 


will  do  the  same  after  us.  In  reality,  however, 
those  things  do  not  change,  but  only  fluctuate 
slightly  at  times  like  the  ebb  and  flow  of  the  sea ; 
now  one  vice  prevails  most,  now  another,  but  bad 
men  have  always  existed,  and  (alas!)  always  will." 
"Morality,  like  everything  else,"  says  Tacitus, 
"  moves  round  in  a  circle."*  We  in  the  nineteenth 
century  have  accustomed  ourselves  to  look  for  and 
expect  some  progress,  but  we  must  at  least  try  to 
avoid  the  temptation  to  blacken  our  ancestors  that 
we  may  make  our  own  improvement  seem  the 
greater. 

*  Tac  Ann.  8.  55. 


(    75    ) 


CHAPTER  IV. 

— ♦ — 

THE  GOVEKNMEOT  AND  SOCIETY, 

It  is  not  possible  to  draw  a  sharp  dividing  line 
between  political  and  social  history.  It  is  true  that 
the  ordinary  current  of  daily  life  seems  to  flow  on 
almost  independent  of  political  changes.  Here 
and  there  the  career  of  individuals  or  even  the 
position  of  classes  may  be  altered,  but  after  all  the 
greater  part  of  our  lives  is  free  from  the  influence 
of  government,  whether  it  be  republican  or  des- 
potic. Still  there  are  ways  in  which  the  form  of 
government  materially  affects  social  life,  and  in 
which  a  violent  change  in  the  constitution  may  be 
expected  to  modify  the  character  of  a  country's 
civilization.  It  is  a  matter  of  great  importance 
whether  speech  is  free  or  not,  whether  a  man  may 
in  word  and  with  the  pen  "  speak  the  thing  he 
will "  :  whether  he  is  unfettered  in  the  exercise  of 
his  religion  and  the  prosecution  of  his  speculations : 
and  whether  in  the  education  of  his  children  he 


76  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

may  use  his  own  discretion  as  to  the  subjects  taught 
and  the  maxims  inculcated.  Again,  it  is  a  matter 
of  importance  whether  each  individual  feels  him- 
self a  sharer  in  the  government,  or  whether  he 
regards  himself  merely  as  a  subject,  with  no  voice  in 
the  making  of  the  laws  which  he  has  to  obey.  It 
is  important  whether  the  laws  are  equal  to  all 
classes,  and  whether  the  citizen  has  an  open  career 
before  him  if  his  abilities  enable  him  to  rise.  All 
these  matters  do  affect  the  social  life  of  a  nation, 
though  they  belong  in  themselves  to  politics  ;  and 
for  this  reason  a  short  chapter  on  the  social  aspect 
of  Roman  Imperialism  seems  to  be  called  for. 

The  Homeric  attribute  of  kings  was  "  shepherds 
of  the  people."  The  expression  sounds  genial 
and  pleasant,  but  the  converse  is  less  satisfactory. 
A  nation  of  civilized  men  should  not  be  comparable 
to  sheep  in  a  sheepfold.  A  sheepfold  may  be  a 
model  of  order  and  good  government,  but  its 
members  being  without  responsibility  may  be  with- 
out intelligence.  A  community  organized  on  this 
principle  is  rightly  regarded  as  a  low  type  of  state. 
To  a  great  extent  this  misfortune  had  befallen 
Rome  in  the  loss  of  her  freedom.  The  emperor 
was  now  the  visible  embodiment  of  the  consti- 


INCREASING  CENTRALIZATION.  77 

tution,  and  the  fountain  of  all  public  movement  of 
every  kind.  The  tendency  to  centralization  be- 
came so  strong  that  nothing  could  be  done  without 
communicating  with  Rome.  The  machinery  of  the 
State  seemed  complete  without  the  interference  of 
private  persons :  there  was  now  no  place  for  the 
citizen  soldier  or  for  the  independent  republican 
magistrate.  As  a  consequence,  the  feeling  of  citizen- 
ship was  largely  impaired.  The  Roman  felt  him- 
self no  longer  a  citizen  but  a  subject,  a  difference 
by  no  means  unimportant. 

The  despotism  of  the  Caesars  was  not  intrusive, 
partly  because  it  was  so  strong.  The  military 
force  on  which  it  chiefly  depended  was  generally 
kept  away  at  the  frontiers,  and  Rome  was  not 
annoyed  by  the  presence  of  a  repressive  police. 
We  do  not  hear  of  condones  being  forbidden  or 
dispersed,  and  the  collegia  or  clubs,  though  not 
held  in  much  favour,  maintained  their  existence 
and  increased  in  number  and  influence.  Thought 
and  speech  were  generally  free,  though  with 
exceptions.  To  take  first  the  matter  of  education. 
We  are  surprised  to  find  the  absolute  freedom  of 
subjects  which  was  allowed  to  teachers.  The 
praises  of  tyrannicide  were  a  common  stock-subject 


78  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

for  declamation,  and  the  burning  questions  of  past 
history  were  handled  with  equal  freedom.  The 
only  occasions,  so  far  as  we  know,  on  which  this 
liberty  was  violated,  were  the  banishment  of 
Carrinas  Secundus  by  Caligula  for  declaiming  against 
tyrants,  the  execution  of  Curiatius  Maternus  by 
Domitian  for  the  same  offence,  and  that  of 
Musonius  and  Virginius  by  Nero.  Literature 
was  more  checked.*  Good  emperors,  of  course, 
allowed  more  freedom  than  tyrants,  but  taking 
the  century  as  a  whole,  the  fear  of  offending 
the  government,  or  the  desire  of  conciliating  it, 
has  an  evil  influence  on  both  poetry  and  prose. 
Instances  of  punishments  inflicted  on  writers  are 
not  rare ;  the  fate  of  Lutorius  Priscus,  under 
Tiberius,  and  of  Arulenus  Rusticus  and  Herennius 
Senecio,  under  Domitian,  are  cases  in  point.  With 
regard  to  religion,  the  government  was  very  tolerant. 
No  compulsion  was  exercised  to  make  men  con- 
form to  the  State  religion  ;  the  utmost  latitude  of 
thought  and  practice  prevailed  without  hindrance. 
The  only  exceptions  were  in  the  case  of  those 
religions  which  were  aggressively  hostile  to  poly- 
theism, and  represented  a  national  and  disloyal 

*  We  shall  speak  of  this  more  fully  in  another  chapter. 


TOLERATION  AND  ITS  LIMITS.  79 

spirit,  like  that  of  the  Jews,  or  those  which  were 
regarded  as  immoral  or  grossly  superstitious,  like 
some  imported  from  Asia  Minor  and  the  far  East. 
There  was,  however,  one  important  point  connected 
with  this  subject  in  which  the  empire  allowed  no 
heterodoxy.  The  worship  of  the  genius  of  the 
emperor  is  one  of  the  most  curious  features  of  the 
century.  It  is  most  difficult  for  us  to  put  ourselves 
in  the  frame  of  mind  in  which  such  a  worship 
seems  possible.  We  must  not,  however,  regard  it 
as  merely  a  political  device  or  an  extravagance  of 
tyranny,  for  it  was  clearly  much  more.  No  doubt 
fear  and  sycophancy  played  an  important  part 
in  the  divine  honours  paid  to  the  emperors,  but 
there  was  a  substratum  of  genuine  feeling  among 
many  of  the  worshippers.  That  this  was  the  case 
cannot  be  doubted  by  any  who  have  observed  the 
numerous  notices  of  the  subject  in  the  literature  of 
the  time.  What  then  was  the  feeling  which 
prompted  so  extraordinary  a  manifestation  ?  Was 
it  akin  to  the  honours  paid  to  the  heroes  and  demi- 
gods of  mythology  ?  In  part  perhaps  it  was  :  but 
we  must  remember  that  these  heroes  were  sanc- 
tified by  antiquity,  and  exalted  by  venerable 
tradition,  while  the  imperial  "gods"  actually  owed 


80  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

their  apotheosis  to  a  vote  of  the  senate,  or  the 
filial  piety  of  their  successors.  It  appears  certain 
that  some  emperors  never  were  deified,  and  that 
their  images  could  accordingly  be  profaned  without 
sacrilege  or  treason.  Deification  was  thus,  at 
best,  the  favourable  verdict  of  a  prince's  successor 
and  subjects  on  his  character.  It  was  not  custo- 
mary to  worship  an  emperor  exactly  as  a  god 
during  his  lifetime,  at  least  at  Rome.  Courtiers 
generally  spoke  of  the  emperor  as  "  our  god," 
"  Namque  erit  ille  mihi  semper  deus,"  "  praesens 
divus  habebitur  Augustus,"  which  does  not  quite 
put  him  on  a  level  with  Jupiter  and  Apollo.  The 
decent  limitation  was,  however,  less  and  less 
observed  as  the  century  wore  on.  In  the  pro- 
vinces temples  were  erected  to  living  emperors  by 
the  score,  and  every  token  of  divine  homage  was 
rendered  to  them.  At  last  Domitian  threw  off  all 
disguise,  and  encouraged  his  courtiers  to  give  him 
the  title  of  "  lord  and  god."  We  must  remember 
that  these  extravagances  were  not  new.  The  poor 
oppressed  provincials  of  the  east  had  long  been 
accustomed  to  propitiate  their  governors  by  quasi- 
divine  honours,  and  we  can  easily  understand  how 
under  the  empire  the  degrading  practice  of  servility 


"BIVUS  CJESAR.n  81 

extended  itself  even  to  Rome.  But  other  reasons 
probably  aided  the  growth  of  the  custom.  The 
man  who  ruled  with  absolute  power  the  whole  of 
the  known  civilised  world  must  have  seemed 
almost  superhuman  ;  it  was  almost  pardonable  to 
regard  him  with  the  awe  inspired  by  a  divine 
being.  And  not  only  was  his  person  exalted  above 
the  rest  of  mankind,  and  his  power  terrible  in  its 
extent  and  strength,  but  he  stood  forth  as  the 
representative  of  that  mighty  empire,  the  like  of 
which  the  world  had  never  seen,  and  which  was 
now  for  the  first  time  concentrated  under  the 
sceptre  of  a  single  man.  The  senate  was  no 
longer  an  assembly  of  kings,  the  Roman  people 
was  no  longer  an  army  of  generals,  but  the  empire 
was  there,  more  imposing  than  ever  in  its  wide 
extent  and  its  new  tranquillity,  and  the  emperor 
was  the  living  embodiment  of  its  strength  and  its 
genius.  The  worship  of  Rome  had  really  been 
the  foundation  of  the  Roman's  faith  from  the  nrst ; 
and  to  some  extent  the  emperor  inherited  what 
was  left  of  the  pious  devotion.  But  whatever  was 
the  origin  of  the  worship,  it  was  enforced  with 
atrocious  jealousy  by  the  legislation  of  the  time. 
Men  were  never  safe  against  accusations  brought 

F 


82  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

by  professional  informers  of  having  insulted  the 
image  of  an  emperor.  Even  coins  bearing  the 
deified  features  were  to  be  regarded  as  sacred ;  and 
slaves  could  find  an  asylum  from  the  lash  of  an 
infuriated  master  by  taking  refuge  in  the  vicinity 
of  an  imperial  statue.  To  the  ordinary  citizen 
this  part  of  the  law  of  majcstas  must  have  been 
the  most  galling  part  of  the  yoke  imposed  by  the 
despotism. 

Private  conversation  on  politics  was  made  un- 
safe by  the  machinations  of  the  informers.  It  was 
considered  best  to  avoid  hazardous  subjects  in 
social  gatherings,  and  specially  when  wine  might 
throw  the  guests  off  their  guard.  This,  of  course, 
differed  at  different  periods  in  the  century.  Some 
emperors  discouraged  the  delatores,  and  allowed 
their  subjects  to  speak  on  any  subject  with  free- 
dom, while  others  had  spies  in  every  house,  and 
noted  every  word  with  jealous  tyranny.  It  is 
more  remarkable  that  in  certain  particulars  the 
Roman  populace  were  able  to  maintain  unimpaired 
their  right  of  free  speech.  We  shall  mention  here- 
after the  "license"  of  the  amphitheatre  and  the 
circus,  where  the  people  were  wont  to  clamour  for 
anything  they  wanted,  including  the  punishment 


FREEDOM  OF  SPEECH.  83 

of  unpopular  ministers ;  and  the  telling  allusions 
so  frequent  in  the  theatre,  which  were  caught  up 
readily  by  the  audience.  Another  characteristic 
privilege  was  that  of  pasquinade,  a  truly  Roman 
invention.  Even  Nero  tolerated  the  most  offensive 
and  cutting  epigrams  against  his  crimes.  After 
he  had  murdered  his  mother,  the  streets  of  Rome 
were  placarded  with  the  following  witty  couplet : 

"  Quis  neget  iEneae  clara  de  stirpe  Neronem  ? 
Sustulit  hie  matrem,  sustulit  ille  patrem  ;" 

and  Tiberius  had  to  endure  the  transformation  of 
his  name  into  "Biberius  Caldius  Mero."  The  most 
abominable  accusations  were  freely  made  against 
any  unpopular  ruler,  and  many  of  them  have  found 
their  way  into  the  scurrilous  work  of  Suetonius. 
Romans  still  valued  their  "simplicity"  and  "ur- 
banity" of  speech,  words  which  were  often 
euphemisms  for  hideous  grossness  and  brutal  jesting. 
The  license  thus  allowed  them  seems,  however,  to 
deserve  mention  as  a  characteristic  feature  of  the 
time. 

We  see,  then,  that  the  despotism  of  the  Caesars, 
though  in  some  respects  mild  and  liberal  in  its 
character,  was  in  others  sufficiently  galling  and 
intrusive  to  exercise  a  malign  influence  on  society. 

F  2 


84  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

This  influence  is  perceptible  in  the  unreality  which 
seems  to  pervade  the  life  of  the  period.  Both  in 
daily  habits  and  in  literature  men  seem  to  be  con- 
stantly straining  after  effect,  and  thinking  anxiously 
how  they  appear  to  others.  Rome  seems  to  be  a 
kind  of  stage,  on  which  the  citizens  perform  their 
part,  as  they  wish  others  to  see  them ;  but  it  is  all 
acting,  not  genuine  living.  Affectation  and  hypo- 
crisy reign  supreme.  Everyone  tries  to  hide  his 
own  nature,  and  appear  something  else.  The 
noblest  spirits  are  a  prey  to  vanity,  and  angle  for 
compliments  from  their  friends.  Added  to  this,  a 
general  feeling  of  insecurity  and  distrust  pervades 
the  intercourse  of  society  and  checks  the  free  de- 
velopment both  of  friendship  and  of  genius.  This 
paralysis  of  true  healthy  life  was  the  price  paid  by 
Rome  for  the  loss  of  her  freedom,  a  loss  which  to 
the  superficial  observer  seemed  more  than  com- 
pensated by  the  termination  of  anarchy  and  the 
establishment  of  settled  order. 

It  will  not  be  digressing  much  to  consider  how 
Roman  society  came  to  acquiesce  in  the  loss  of 
liberty  consequent  on  the  change  of  constitution, 
how  it  probably  regarded  its  position,  and  what 
compensations  it  could  enjoy. 


PASSION  FOR  FOREIGN  CONQUEST.        86 

In  the  first  place,*  the  restoration  of  peace  and 
order  must  have  been  felt  as  an  immense  boon. 
Rome  was  no  longer  torn  by  intestine  strife,  to 
the  delight  of  Parthians  and  Germans.  Once  more 
she  could  turn  her  attention  to  foreign  conquest, 
still  the  passion  of  all  patriots.  "The  accursed 
civil  wars  had  arrested  the  progress  of  the  legions, 
which  might  ere  now  have  subdued  Bactria,  and 
carried  the  fasces  beyond  the  Indus.  Now  the 
victorious  eagles  will  penetrate  to  Thule  and  Cale- 
donia, and  palm-bearing  Idume.  There  still  remain 
new  lands  to  conquer.  Babylon  does  not  yet  pay 
tribute ;  the  Arabs  and  Seres  are  not  yet  our  sup- 
pliants ;  the  Indian  laurel  has  yet  to  be  placed  in 
the  lap  of  Jove."  Such  is  the  language  of  Silius 
and  Statius.  From  this  point  of  view  even  patriots 
might  regard  the  empire  as  a  blessing :  it  certainly 
for  the  time  increased  the  aggressive  power  of 
Rome,  though  a  wise  policy  restrained  conquest 
within  narrow  limits.  In  .fact,  security  was  much 
more  important  than  glory,  as  Augustus  felt.  His 
passionate  distress  at  the  defeat  of  Varus  was 
caused  by  his  consciousness  that  the  justification 
of  the  empire  really  rested  in  its  power  to  ward 

*  See  Tac.  Ann.  1,  2,  on  this  subject. 


86  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

off  foreign  attack,  and  preserve  security  at  home. 
The  "Pax  Romana"  was  the  great  gift  of  Csesarism 
to  the  world. 

We  should  also  notice  the  republican  avoidance 
of  titles  and  court  etiquette  which  signalised  the 
early  despotism.  The  person  of  the  emperor  was 
always  accessible  :  he  mixed  in  ordinary  society  at 
banquets  and  entertainments :  he  corresponded 
with  his  officials  in  a  tone  of  easy  familiarity,  as 
we  see  in  the  letters  between  Pliny  and  Trajan : 
and  he  never  claimed  either  from  subjects  or  aliens 
the  insignia  of  royalty.  When  the  king  of  Parthia 
began  a  despatch,  "  Arsaces,  king  of  kings,  to  Fla- 
vius  Vespasianus,  greeting,"  that  emperor  replied 
in  the  same  form,  disdaining  to  notice  the  arro- 
gance of  the  Oriental  sultan. 

But  the  idea  of  subjection  to  a  master  could  not 
really  shock  the  minds  of  Romans  at  this  period. 
They  were  too  much  used  to  a  society  organised 
on  this  principle.  The  existence  of  the  slave  world 
was  a  standing  contradiction  of  the  rights  of  man, 
and  furnished  examples  and  lessons  in  servility 
which  the  masters  were  not  slow  to  learn.  The 
idea  of  domination  and  subjection  as  the  natural 
order  of  things  had  really  penetrated  the  spirit  of 


SERVILE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  AGE.  87 

the  age,  and  choked  all  remaining  aspirations  after 
liberty.  With  what  satisfaction  Statius  enunciates 
his  theory  of  universal  servitude  ! 

"  Quid  enim  terrisque  poloque 
Parendi  sine  lege  manet  1    Vice  cuncta  reguntur, 
Alternisque  regunt :  propriis  sub  regibus  omnia 
Terra  ;  premit  felix  regum  diademata  Roma  : 
Hanc  ducibus  f  renare  datum  :  mox  crescit  in  illos 
Imperium  superis." 

We  seem  not  far  from  Claudian's  "  magnorum 
suboles  regum"  addressed  to  an  empress.  The 
malign  influence  of  slavery  was  felt  by  the  Romans 
themselves.  "  You  are  indignant,"  says  Seneca  to 
his  countrymen,  "  if  your  slave  or  freedman  or 
client  dares  to  answer  you  again  ;  and  then  you 
complain  that  the  liberty  which  you  have  destroyed 
at  home  has  been  taken  from  the  Republic."*  A 
remarkable  passage,  which  indicates  with  true  dis- 
crimination the  source  of  the  diseases  of  the  body 
politic. 

In  reality  the  inhabitants  of  the  Roman  empire 
were  fitting  themselves  rapidly  for  their  destiny  as 
subjects  of  an  autocrat.  We  need  not  expatiate  on 
the  disintegration  of  nationalities  and  the  cosmo- 
politan feelings  which  were  growing  throughout 

*  Sen.  de  Ira  3.  35. 


88  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

the  century.  The  old  narrow  patriotism,  which 
was  the  safeguard  of  political  freedom,  was  fast 
disappearing,  and  men  began  to  pride  themselves 
on  being  citizens  of  the  world,  which  in  all  times 
has  been  a  pretext  for  selfish  individualism.  The 
opening  out  of  the  world  to  trade  and  travel,  was, 
however,  a  quite  legitimate  ground  of  satisfaction. 
It  was  a  real  benefit  conferred  by  the  empire,  and 
one  that  was  highly  appreciated.  The  loss  of  liberty, 
and  of  the  feelings  which  liberty  fosters,  was  a  mis- 
fortune for  which  nothing  could  make  up  ;  but  the 
enlargement  of  sympathies,  and  opening  of  the 
mind  consequent  on  the  fusion  of  nationalities, 
were  no  small  compensation.  Never  before  in  the 
history  of  the  world  (shall  we  add,  never  since  ?) 
had  the  nations  of  the  civilised  world  been  brought 
so  near  each  other.  Commerce  was  secured,  and 
flourished  under  a  widely  extended  system  of  free 
trade  ;  brigandage  and  piracy  were  suppressed,  for 
the  first  time  since  men  began  to  float  ships  in  the 
Mediterranean  ;  order  and  prosperity  seemed  to 
be  established  over  the  whole  empire.  Never  till 
the  present  century  has  travel  been  so  easy  or  so 
frequent ;  every  one  who  had  money  and  leisure 
might  visit  securely  the  historical  scenes  of  an- 


COMMERCE  AND  TRAVEL  89 

tiquity,  the  masterpieces  of  nature's  handiwork,  or 
the  last  conquests  of  civilization;  one  language, 
one  system  of  coinage,  carried  the  traveller  over 
lands  where  now  all  is  local  and  different,  and  all 
these  blessings  were  the  gift  of  the  Eternal  City, 
which  seemed  no  longer  the  mistress  but  the 
mother  of  the  world. 


"  Haec  est,  in  gremium  victos  quaB  sola  recepit, 
Humanumque  genus  communi  nomine  fovit 
Matris  non  dominae  ritu  ;  civesque  vocavit 
Quos  domuit,  nexuque  pio  longinqua  revinxit : 
Hujus  pacificis  debemus  moribus  omnes 
Quod  veluti  patriis  regionibus  utitur  hospes  ; 
Quod  sedem  mutare  licet ;  quod  cernere  Thulen 
Lusus,  et  horrendos  quondam  penetrare  recessus ; 
Quod  bibimus  passim  Rbodanum,  potamus  Oronten, 
Quod  cuncti  gen3  una  sumus."* 


The  provincials  gained  also  in  better  adminis- 
tration. This  was,  in  great  measure,  the  conse- 
quence of  the  more  liberal  feelings  which,  as  we 
said,  were  growing  up  under  the  empire.  It  was 
natural  that  as  the  exclusiveness  of  nationality 
diminished,  a  more  generous  treatment  of  subjects 
and  aliens  was  promoted.    Some  have  denied  that 

*  Claudian  de  Cons.  Stilich.  8.  150-159. 


90  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

this  was  the  case;*  but  the  evidence  for  the  im- 
provement is  very  strong.  Even  such  men  as 
Petronius  and  Vitellius  were  clean-handed  as 
governors  of  provinces,  and  the  testimony  of  con- 
temporary writers,  Philo,  Josephus,  Strabo,  Plutarch, 
and  others,  is  all  in  favour  of  the  belief  that  ex- 
tortion and  oppression  were  rarer  than  under  the 
republic.  Even  the  frequency  of  trials  for  mal- 
administration is,  if  rightly  considered,  a  proof  of 
the  vigilance  of  the  central  government  in  the 
interest  of  the  provinces. 

Another  pleasing  feature  in  this  connection  is  the 
encouragement  and  practice  of  what  we  may  call 
municipal  patriotism.  It  is  a  side  of  Roman  life 
which  fairly  belongs  to  our  subject.  We  hear  fre- 
quently of  grants  from  the  treasury  to  aid  sufferers 
from  accidents.  Thus  six  millions  of  sesterces  were 
given  to  Lugdunum  after  a  fire  in  the  year  65  ;f  ten 
millions  in  53  to  Bononia.J  Augustus  and  Ves- 
pasian both  practised    the  same  munificence  on 

*  On  this  side  may  be  mentioned  the  picture  drawn  by  Juvenal 
8.  87-139  ;  the  cases  of  Valerius  Messalla  in  Asia,  under  Augustus, 
of  Silius  in  Germany,  of  Piso  in  Spain,  and  of  Felix  and  Pontius 
Pilate  in  Judaea.  The  evidence  on  the  other  side  is,  however, 
much  stronger. 

f  Tac.  Ann.  16.  13. 

X  Tac.  Ann.  12.  58. 


MUNICIPAL  PATRIOTISM.  91 

several  occasions.  The  early  emperors  did  not 
build  much  in  provincial  towns  except  by  way  of 
indemnity  for  accident,  but  they  encouraged  private 
citizens  to  erect  public  buildings  in  their  native 
towns,  and  the  practice  became  very  common.  We 
recognise,  with  pleasure,  some  remains  of  the  old 
patriotism  surviving  in  this  shape.  Rich  men  took 
a  pride  in  embellishing  their  own  towns  with  baths, 
libraries,  temples,  and  other  public  buildings.  En- 
dowments for  education,  or  the  relief  of  the  desti- 
tute, became  common,  and  even  small  country 
towns  often  enjoyed  these  advantages  through  the 
liberality  of  their  citizens. 

Such  acts  of  munificence  must  have  been  a  poor 
substitute  for  genuine  patriotism,  but  it  may  be 
doubted  whether  many  felt  the  deprivation.  For 
the  generality  of  Rome's  subjects  and  citizens  in 
the  first  century  the  empire  must  have  seemed  a 
desirable  institution,  which  enabled  them  to  satisfy 
most  of  their  wants,  and  live  in  comparative  com- 
fort and  security.  Material  prosperity  is  always 
the  main  thing  with  the  mass  of  mankind;  and* 
those  nobler  sentiments  which  sometimes  lead  men 
to  rise  above  it  were,  as  we  have  said,  scarcely 
possible  in  the  first  century.     The    intellectual 


92  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

voluptuary  who  represented  the  upper  class  at 
Rome  found  himself  quite  in  his  element;  and  those 
who  had  to  work  for  their  living,  so  far  as  their 
position  was  altered,  found  more  security  and 
better  chances  of  profit  and  success  than  in  the 
disordered  times  of  the  Republic.  Regrets  and 
discontent  were  chiefly  confined  to  the  philoso- 
phers, a  class,  morally  important,  but  numerically 
insignificant,  whose  exalted  theories  raised  them 
above  content  in  ease  and  indolence,  and  revealed 
to  them  the  true  significance  of  the  empire  of  the 
Caesars. 


(    93    ) 


CHAPTER  V. 

— ♦ — 

LITEEATUEE  AM)  AET. 

The  victory  of  Augustus  was  probably  a  misfor- 
tune for  Roman  literature,  though  few  would  have 
predicted  a  decline  while  that  brilliant  company  of 
poets  and  historians  flourished  under  the  Imperial 
patronage  of  the  second  Caesar.  But  though  the 
immediate  results  of  the  Empire  were  splendid, 
the  cramping  and  paralysing  influence  of  despotism 
was  not  long  in  making  itself  felt.  It  acted  in 
three  ways.  First,  it  obliged  writers  to  spoil  their 
work  and  do  violence  to  their  conscience  by  direct 
flattery  to  the  reigning  emperor.  This  was  carried 
to  a  monstrous  extent,  and  was  practised  even  by 
the  most  honourable  men.  Next  the  loss  of  free 
speech  corrupted  the  intellectual  honesty  and  manly 
straightforwardness  of  the  community.  Men  ceased 
to  be  their  real  selves,  and  to  speak  their  real  senti- 
ments, even  when  no  danger  threatened  them. 
The  literature  of  our  period  is  pervaded  by  affecta- 


94  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

tion,  hollow  rhetoric,  and  a  constant  straining  after 
effect.  Words,  not  things,  were  the  first  object 
with  poet  and  prose  writer  alike :  men  cared  less 
to  say  what  was  true  and  of  sterling  worth  than 
to  gain  a  transitory  reputation  by  following  the 
shallow  taste  of  the  day.  Again,  despotism  in- 
fluenced the  proportion  of  the  kinds  of  composition. 
Poetry  gained  at  the  expense  of  prose;  history, 
which  was  a  very  congenial  pursuit  to  the  Romans 
of  the  Republic,  became  very  dangerous,  and  we 
have  suffered  by  the  discouragement  thus  given  to 
historians,  as  well  as  by  the  trammels  which  fettered 
those  who  did  venture  to  write.  In  the  reign  of 
Tiberius,  Titus  Labienus,  while  reading  his  history 
to  his  friends,  turned  over  several  pages,  with  the 
remark  "  These  will  be  read  after  my  death."  His 
caution,  however,  did  not  save  him,  for  his  book  was 
confiscated  and  burnt.  A  stronger  instance  is  that 
of  Cremutius  Cordus,  who  was  actually  accused  and 
driven  to  suicide  for  calling  Cassius  "the  last  of 
the  Romans."  His  book  was  also  burnt,  but  copies 
of  it  were  hidden  and  afterwards  published.  We 
can  only  be  surprised  that  such  tyranny  did  not 
ruin  literature  altogether.  Happily  the  better  em- 
perors allowed  much  more  freedom,  and  the  worst 


FFECT  OF  DESPOTISM  ON  LITERATURE.   95 

tyrants  were  not  suffered  to  reign  till  the  natural 
end  of  their  lives.  Still,  the  mischief  done  to  his- 
tory was  great,  as  Tacitus  himself  confesses.  Facts 
were  suppressed  or  falsified  during  an  emperor's 
lifetime,  and  exaggerated  through  hatred  after  his 
death. 

Another  cause  of  the  unreality  of  Roman  litera- 
ture at  this  epoch  is  to  be  found  in  the  system  of 
education.  Declamation  and  poetry  formed  the 
staple  subjects,  and  poetry  was  chiefly  taught  as 
an  aid  to  declamation.  The  pupil  was  instructed 
in  composing  themes  on  given  subjects,  sometimes 
delivering  a  harangue  to  an  imaginary  jury,  some- 
times writing  an  essay  to  prove  a  given  proposi- 
tion, sometimes  arguing  with  another  pupil  in  the 
presence  of  the  instructor,  as  used  to  be  done  at 
Cambridge.  Questions  of  casuistry  were  often 
chosen,  the  pupil,  of  course,  taking  the  side 
assigned  him  by  the  teacher.  This  system  was 
only  too  well  calculated  to  develope  the  tendency 
of  the  age  to  affectation,  unreality,  and  empty 
declamation.  We  see  the  fruits  of  it  as  well  in 
Lucan  as  in  Seneca,  in  Statius  as  in  Velleius. 

We  may  also  notice  the  evil  effect  of  the  "  caco- 
ethes  scribendi "  which  had  come  upon  the  Roman 


96  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

people.  We  find  various  artifices  obviously  em- 
ployed to  catch  the  popular  ear,  which  else  might 
have  failed  to  notice  the  work  in  the  multitudinous 
buzz  of  poetasters  and  rhetoricians.  The  means 
employed  are  those  with  which  we  are  so  painfully 
familiar  in  the  nineteenth  century.  One  writer 
tries  to  let  off  a  perpetual  fire  of  squibs  or  epi- 
grams :  another  daubs  on  his  colours  to  be  seen  a 
mile  off:  another  plays  bold  tricks  with  syntax 
and  construction  :  a  fourth  enwraps  himself  in 
mystifying  obscurity.  All  endeavour  to  be  striking 
in  one  way  or  another,  and,  of  course,  all  fail  to 
retain  the  grace  and  dignity  of  true  genius. 

It  is  time,  however,  to  specify  more  accurately 
the  literary  movements  of  the  century.  The 
ordinary  division  into  the  Julian  and  Flavian  eras 
is  no  arbitrary  one,  but  a  real  coincidence.  The 
accession  of  Vespasian,  so  important  a  landmark 
in  other  branches  of  our  subject,  is  equally  so  as 
the  beginning  of  a  reaction  in  literature  against  the 
fashions  of  the  last  half  century.  It  is  to  this 
earlier  division  that  our  remarks  above  mainly 
apply.  The  reign  of  Tiberius  exemplifies  the 
deadening  weight  with  which  tyranny  can  oppress 
literature.    As  the  brilliant  names  of  the  Augustan 


POST- A  UG  USTAN  LITERA  TURE.  97 

era  disappear,  a  dull  blank  succeeds.  All  seems 
under  a  cloud.  Perhaps  the  shadow  of  the  great 
names  had  a  depressing  effect  as  well  as  the 
jealousy  of  the  Emperor.  Then  under  Claudius 
the  copious  stream  of  silver  age  literature  bursts 
forth  with  all  its  transient  vivacity.  The  charac- 
teristics of  the  age  are  a  feverish  extravagance  and 
unrestrained  violence  of  expression.  It  is  the 
saturnalia  of  the  declaimer.  History  is  repre- 
sented by  two  works  published  before  the  death  of 
Tiberius,  the  servile  and  affected  book  of  Velleius, 
and  the  feeble  and  rhetorical  anecdotes  of 
Valerius  Maximus.  Seneca,  the  noblest  figure  of 
the  age,  extorts  our  admiration  by  his  steady  per- 
ception of  objective  or  abstract  morality,  and  by 
his  philanthropic  desire  to  improve  his  fellow  men, 
in  both  of  which  points  he  marks  a  real  advance  in 
the  moral  theory  of  his  age.  He  has  not,  how- 
ever, escaped  the  vicious  style  of  his  contem- 
poraries. He  is  declamatory,  epigrammatic,  jerky, 
sometimes  unreal  in  tone.  We  cannot  deny  the 
truth  of  Quintilian's  criticism  that  he  sacrificed  true 
excellence  of  style  to  gain  the  applause  of  the 
vulgar.  In  Lucan,  the  representative  of  the  age  in 
poetry,  the  same  faults  appear  most  clearly.    His 

G 


98  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

epic  is  a  string  of  declamations,  the  intervening 
narrative  (often  really  the  most  important)  is 
hurried  over  whenever  it  does  not  lend  itself  to  his 
rhetoric  ;  and  so  the  proportion  and  even  the  in- 
telligibility of  the  poem  is  seriously  impaired.  The 
violent  exaggeration  of  the  descriptions  offends  our 
taste  as  much  as  the  affectation  of  learning ;  and 
the  poet  shews  an  evident  relish  for  detailed  scenes 
of  torture  and  bloodshed,  which  suggests  that  he  or 
his  patrons  were  deeply  corrupted  in  their  taste  by 
the  horrors  of  the  amphitheatre.  His  flattery  of 
Nero,  though  nauseous  enough,  is  perhaps  excu- 
sable. These  writers,  though  vastly  inferior  to 
their  predecessors  of  the  time  of  Augustus,  have 
yet  to  some  extent  the  merit  of  originality.  They 
were  not  conscious  of  their  defects,  and  therefore 
disdained  to  borrow  their  style  or  their  matter 
from  those  who  had  gone  before  them.  Lucan 
seldom  imitates  Virgil ;  Seneca  owes  little  to  Cicero. 
Petronius  may  even  claim  the  merit  of  attaining 
excellence  in  an  almost  new  branch  of  literature. 
For  a  few  years  Rome  was  satisfied  with  the  new 
development ;  but  its  faults  were  too  apparent 
to  escape  detection  for  long ;  and  with  the  death 
of  Nero  the  inevitable  reaction  set  in. 


THE  FLAVIAN  ERA.  99 

"  Scripsit  majore  cura  quam  ingenio  "  is  Pliny's 
criticism  on  Silius  Italicus,  and  this,  as  Merivale 
says,  may  be  taken  as  the  motto  of  the  Flavian 
era.  A  strong  reaction  now  set  in  against  the 
school  of  Lucan  and  Seneca,  and  men  began  to 
turn  with  pleasure  to  the  nobler  works  of  the 
Augustan  age.  The  affectation  and  unreality 
which  had  been  growing  during  the  last  fifty  years 
had  now  become  really  intolerable  ;  there  was  no 
remedy  except  in  conscious  imitation  of  better 
models.  Accordingly  the  poets  of  this  period, 
Statius  and  Silius,  are  close,  though  not  servile, 
imitators  of  Virgil ;  they  lack  the  vigour  of  Lucan, 
but  avoid  his  worst  faults.  It  cannot  be  said,  how- 
ever, that  they  impress  us  with  their  reality. 
Statius  gives  us  a  constant  succession  of  pretty 
word-paintings,  composed  rather  with  a  view  to 
the  recitation-hall  than  to  satisfy  the  student  of 
the  "  Thebaid"  as  a  whole.  It  is  u  ars,"  not  "  in- 
genium"  throughout ;  he  is  never  dull,  but  never 
inspiring  or  inspired.  This  elaboration  of  parts  at 
the  expense  of  the  whole  is  characteristic  of  the 
autumn  of  a  literature  ;  the  influence  of  recitations 
is  peculiar  to  Rome,  but  not  characteristic  of  this 
era.    On  the  contrary,  most  of  the  Flavian  litera- 

G  2 


100  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

ture  was  obviously  meant  to  be  read,  not  recited. 
In  fact,  the  eternal  recitations  had  become  such  a 
nuisance  that  the  public  began  to  strike  against 
them.  Martial  describes  the  poet  with  his  manu- 
script as  more  formidable  than  a  tigress  robbed 
of  her  whelps.  The  cheapness  of  books  made  the 
system  really  useless,*  and  only  the  laziness  of  the 
public,  and,  perhaps,  the  crabbed  writing  of  the 
manuscripts,  had  allowed  recitation  to  flourish  as 
long  as  it  did.  Silius  is  an  agreeable  but  not  a 
very  powerful  writer.  His  epic  is  tolerably  well 
arranged,  and  contains  few  faults  of  taste.  Both 
he  and  Statius  are  sobriety  itself  compared  with 
Lucan. 

There  are  indications  that  the  material  condition 
of  the  poet  had  not  changed  for  the  better  since 
the  Julian  era.  Some  poets  (e.g.  Silius)  were  rich 
men,  and  free  from  anxiety  of  this  kind;  but 
Martial  is  perpetually  begging  for  money  from  the 
emperor  and  from  his  friends,  and  he  does  not 
seem  to  have  got  anything  from  Domitian,  in  spite 
of  his  servility.  Martial  shews  us  other  annoy- 
ances of  the  poet's  life :    the  unscrupulous  pla- 

*  We  should  notice  also  the  increase  of  public  libraries  about 
this  time.  Eventually  Borne  contained  no  less  than  28  of  these 
institutions. 


MARTIAL.  101 


giarism  of  bad  writers,  and  their  equally  dishonest 
habit  of  fathering  their  own  productions  upon  a 
great  name.  Again,  the  jealousy  of  literary  men 
shews  itself  disagreeably.  Martial  seems  to  have 
had  a  chronic  quarrel  with  Statius.  On  the  other 
hand,  Pliny  the  Younger  seems  to  have  been  on 
the  pleasantest  terms  with  his  literary  contem- 
poraries. 

Martial  is  the  most  brilliant  representative  of  the 
Flavian  era.  His  epigrams  are  absolutely  perfect 
of  their  kind,  and  have  never  been  surpassed  or 
even  rivalled.  The  obscenity  which  disfigures 
them  is  an  evil  sign  of  the  times,  but  it  was  consi- 
dered a  necessary  adjunct  of  that  kind  of  poetry. 
Even  the  virtuous  and  refined  Pliny  composed 
some  very  improper  epigrams,  which  have  come 
down  to  us.  Martial,  however,  carried  it  to 
excess,  in  his  thirst  for  popularity  and  patronage. 
His  servility  is  hardly  less  offensive  than  his  inde- 
cency. In  this,  however,  he  was  rivalled  by 
Statius,  who  did  not  grudge  his  incense  to  the 
freedmen  Etruscus  aud  Abascantus. 

Juvenal  in  some  respects  belongs  to  the  age 
before  him.  His  ideas  are  old-fashioned,  reflecting 
the  hardness    and    exclusivenes    of  the  ancient 


102  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

Roman  character,  which  was  now  so  fast  disap- 
pearing. His  invectives  against  the  Greeks,  his 
hatred  of  parvenus,  his  coarse  ferocity  in  dealing 
with  the  female  sex,  are  all  part  of  this  retro- 
spective tendency.  He  left  no  successor  and  no 
imitator  in  the  second  century. 

To  turn  to  the  prose  of  the  Flavian  era.  The 
leader  and  mouthpiece  of  the  reaction  is  Quintilian. 
He  metes  out  much  less  than  justice  to  Seneca  and 
his  school,  and  is  never  tired  of  setting  up  Cicero 
as  the  canon  of  good  taste  and  good  style.  His 
own  work  is  admirable,  of  its  kind;  clear,  thoughtful, 
and  temperate.  His  criticisms  are  all  worthy  of 
attention,  and  are  delivered  without  affectation  or 
bombast. 

The  graver  tone  of  the  age  was  reflected  in  its 
histories.  The  old  conception  of  the  historian,  as 
an  artist  in  prose,  whose  pictures  were  founded, 
indeed,  on  real  events,  but  were  avowedly  embel- 
lished for  the  pleasure  of  his  readers,  was  no  longer 
deemed  sufficient.  In  Tacitus  we  have  a  historian 
of  the  modern  kind ;  a  man  with  a  mission  and  a 
purpose,  who  is  terribly  in  earnest  with  his  facts 
and  theories.  In  spite  of  the  crippling  influence  of 
tyranny,  which  no   doubt  thinned   the  ranks  of 


TACITUS  AND  THE  PLINIES.  103 

historians,  we  welcome  one  name,  at  least,  of  the 
highest  genius  in  this  difficult  time. 

The  industry  of  the  aristocratic  student  is  well 
typified  in  the  elder  Pliny,  whose  habits  we  have 
already  described.  His  work  is  an  undigested 
congeries  of  facts,  the  sweepings  of  a  hundred  note 
books,  which  do  not  derive  any  of  their  value  from 
the  medium  through  which  they  have  been  trans- 
mitted to  posterity.  His  nephew  is  a  more  in- 
teresting character.  His  letters  have  been  well 
described  as  giving  us  our  best  picture  of  the  Roman 
gentleman.  The  expression  aptly  denotes  the 
character  of  the  man  as  he  has  drawn  it  for  us  him- 
self. No  other  work  of  Roman  literature  gives  us 
so  high  an  idea  of  the  real  civilisation  of  the  age  as 
Pliny's  letters.  They  show  a  refinement  of  ideas 
and  true  culture  which  are  not  apparent  in  his  con- 
temporaries, and  they  are  thus  a  valuable  corrective 
of  the  common  tendency  to  brand  Roman  civilisa- 
tion as  only  material  and  external.  In  most  ways 
Pliny  is  nearer  the  nineteenth  century  than  any 
writer  of  the  middle  ages.  His  tastes,  sympathies, 
and  even  modes  of  expression,  are  strangely  modern. 
Now  he  describes  the  beauties  of  nature  with  a  fine 
appreciation ;  now  he  interests  himself  in  founding 


104  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

a  school  and  free  library  at  his  native  town ;  now 
he  writes  a  letter  of  condolence  or  of  recommenda- 
tion; now  he  shews  graceful  consideration  for 
his  dependents.  All  is  amazingly  modern — rather 
French  than  English  in  its  vanity  and  want  of 
reserve,  but  nearer  to  us  than  the  English  writings 
of  the  time  of  Elizabeth. 

It  remains  to  notice  the  reaction  in  favour  of 
the  ante- Augustan  poets  which  took  place  in  the 
early  empire.  Even  the  great  Augustan  poets 
themselves  were  attacked  for  disparaging  criticism 
of  Lucilius  and  Ennius.  But  the  new  style  at  first 
carried  all  before  it.  The  archaic  school  comes 
into  prominence  in  the  last  half  of  the  century,  and 
grows  in  strength  till  it  culminates  about  the  time 
of  the  Antonines.  In  our  period  it  had  not  yet 
gained  its  victory.  Horace  and  Virgil  were  not 
yet  displaced  by  Naevius  and  Ennius ;  Cicero  still 
held  the  field  against  Caius  Gracchus  and  Cato. 
But  the  tendency  to  neglect  the  moderns  was 
increasing  all  the  time.  It  was  a  sign  that  the 
nation  was  losing  its  taste,  and  felt  that  it  was 
losing  it.  The  rugged  efforts  of  the  founders  of 
Latin  poetry  were  admired  not  for  themselves, 
but  as  being  free  from  the  false  accretions  of  later 


TASTE  FOR  A  RCHA IC  LITER  A  TURE.       105 

times.  Men  could  not  even  venture  to  set  up  the 
Augustans  as  models,  for  fear  of  imbibing  the  first 
beginnings  of  decadence.  The  only  safe  course 
seemed  to  be  to  go  back  as  far  as  possible,  and 
worry  the  minds  of  schoolboys  with  the  uncouth 
and  obsolete  phrases  of  the  third  and  second  cen- 
turies, B.C.,  which,  at  least,  no  one  could  accuse  of 
meretricious  ornament  or  emasculate  smoothness. 
We  notice  even  in  the  mature  writings  of  the  silver 
age  the  reappearance  of  several  words  whicji  had 
passed  out  of  use  for  a  hundred  years,  doubtless 
the  result  of  this  fashion  in  education. 

In  the  fine  arts,  sculpture,  painting,  and  music, 
Rome  fully  acknowledged  her  inferiority  to  Greece, 
and  proudly  disdained  to  compete  with  her.  The 
well-known  lines  of  Virgil — ■ 

"  Excudent  alii  spirantia  mollius  asra 
Credo  equidem,  et  vivos  ducent  de  marmore  vnltns  ; 
Tu  regere  imperio  populos,  Romane,  memento," 

are  a  faithful  expression  of  Roman  feeling  on  the 
subject.  Art  was  beneath  the  dignity  of  the  con- 
querors of  the  world.  The  most  ardent  patriotism 
need  not  blush  to  confess  inferiority  in  the  use  of 
the  chisel  or  the  paint-brush.  But  in  truth  it  was 
not  only  pride  but  conscious  inability  that  pre- 


106  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  HOME. 

vented  Italy  from  entering  the  field  in  art-compe- 
tition with  Greece.  For  many  generations  Rome 
had  been  full  of  the  masterpieces  of  Phidias,  Poly- 
cletus,  Apelles,  and  Mentor,  but  no  Roman  school 
of  sculpture  or  painting  was  brought  into  being  by 
the  presence  of  these  works  of  genius.  No  books 
on  art  from  a  Roman  pen  called  the  attention  of 
citizens  to  the  special  beauties  of  each  artist ;  no 
real  appreciation  of  art  is  shewn  even  by  the  culti- 
vated poets  of  the  first  century.  The  raptures  of 
Statius  over  a  grand  collection  or  an  imposing 
building  are  not  those  of  the  artist ;  the  Augustan 
poets  scarcely  mention  the  "nation  of  statues" 
that  adorned  the  streets  and  temples  of  the  capi- 
tal. In  republican  times  devotion  to  art  was  dis- 
couraged and  despised.  Marcellus,  who  captured 
Syracuse,  was  severely  blamed  for  introducing  the 
taste  for  Greek  art  into  Rome,  and  thus  diverting 
the  attention  of  the  citizens  from  more  useful 
pursuits.  Cicero  in  the  trial  of  Verres  explains  to 
the  jury  that  the  Greeks  attach  a  quite  unaccount- 
able importance  to  the  works  of  certain  sculptors, 
of  which  Verres  had  deprived  them.  Even  in  our 
period,  when  the  fire  under  Nero  destroyed  an 
innumerable  quantity  of  precious  masterpieces,  his- 


WANT  OF  ARTISTIC  TASTE.  107 

torians  content  themselves  with  mentioning  the 
bare  fact,  without  regret  or  comment.  There  was, 
however,  growing  up  a  sentiment  of  admiration  for 
art,  which  never,  indeed,  developed  into  an  intelli- 
gent appreciation,  but  shewed  itself  in  a  wide- 
spread dilettantism  and  passion  for  collecting,  and 
a  great  deal  of  pretence  of  knowledge.  It  was 
common  for  these  amateurs  to  profess  that  they 
were  able  to  distinguish  the  works  of  one  great 
master  from  another,  and  to  discover  at  a  glance 
a  spurious  imitation.  Antique  bronzes  could  be 
tested,  so  they  averred,  by  the  smell.  Trimalchio 
tells  his  guests  that  he  would  give  up  anything 
rather  than  his  faculty  as  an  art  critic — a  talent 
which  he  proceeds  to  illustrate  by  the  most  absurd 
blunders  in  explaining  the  mythological  subjects  in 
his  collection.  It  was,  indeed,  inevitable  that  the 
Romans,  in  patronising  an  art  which  they  did  not 
understand  and  seldom  tried  to  practise,  should 
appear  in  the  light  of  parvenus  who  fill  their 
houses  with  masterpieces  which  they  cannot  appre- 
ciate, or  with  imitations  which  they  cannot  detect. 
The  chief  exceptions  to  this  insensibility  seem  to 
be  Pliny  the  Younger  and  Lucian,  especially  the 
latter.    Pliny  took  a  genuine  pleasure  in  the  Corin- 


108  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

thian  statuettes  and  other  works  of  art  with  which 
he  adorned  his  houses ;  and  Lucian,  when  he  men- 
tions the  subject,  shows  a  fine  discrimination,  more 
Greek  than  Roman.  The  causes  of  this  defect  in 
Roman  cultivation  seem  to  be  three.  First,  the 
natural  incapacity  of  the  Roman  mind  to  under- 
stand and  appreciate  artistic  genius  :  next,  the  low 
position  occupied  by  most  sculptors  and  painters, 
who  were  generally  either  slaves  or  freedmen : 
and,  thirdly,  the  want  of  life  and  originality  in  the 
artistic  world  itself,  which  prevented  it  from  ex- 
citing public  interest  or  claiming  public  admiration. 
This  last  reason  may  be,  perhaps,  demurred  to. 
We  do  not  find  it  easy  to  associate  the  notion  of 
decline  with  the  age  which  produced,  e.g.,  the 
Laocoon  group*,  or  the  majestic  portrait-statue  of 
Nerva.  But  we  have  now  unfortunately  lost  most 
of  the  splendid  Greek  originals  which  gave  a  model 
to  all  sculptors  of  the  Roman  age — works  of  genius 
which  completely  threw  into  the  shade  the  feebler 
efforts  of  fi  SovXi)  'E\Xa<5.  The  most  skilful  imita- 
tions (and  some  of  them  are  works  of  great  talent) 
could  not  arouse  the  same  enthusiasm  as  new  crea- 
tions from  the  hand  of  a  real  genius ;  and  the  con- 

*  The  latest  authorities  on  archaeology  now  ascribe  this  statue 
to  an  earlier  date. 


SCULPTURE.  109 


sciousness  of  this  deterioration  may  have  had  much 
to  do  with  the  flagging  interest  which  the  public 
took  in  the  painter's  or  sculptor's  studio. 

Virgil  was  right  in  naming  sculpture  as  the  art 
in  which  "  others  "  most  excelled  his  countrymen. 
Very  few  men  of  Italian  birth  attempted  sculpture. 
It  was  then  and  for  ever  the  birthright  of  the 
Greeks,  and  no  Roman  attempted  to  dispute  that 
supremacy.  The  modern  writer  is  tempted  to 
linger  with  mixed  wonder  and  regret  over  this 
most  exquisite  product  of  the  old  civilisation. 
When  we  visit  London,  and  come  suddenly  upon 
one  of  the  grotesque  statues  with  which  our 
metropolis  is  disfigured,  we  cannot  help  marvel- 
ling how  an  art  once  so  perfect  should  have  been 
so  completely  lost.  What  must  have  been  the 
beauty  of  a  city  of  the  ancient  world,  where  every 
street,  every  temple,  every  open  space,  was  en- 
nobled by  those  exquisite  forms  of  marble  and 
bronze,  the  mutilated  remnants  of  which  are  the 
greatest  feast  for  modern  eyes  ?  These  triumphs 
of  human  genius,  which  had  formerly  been  the 
pride  of  every  Greek  city,  from  Massilia  to  Asia 
Minor,  were  now  for  the  most  part  transferred  to 
Rome  and  other  Italian  towns.    The  discovery  of 


110  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

Herculaneum  and  Pompeii  first  revealed  to  us 
how  widely  diffused  was  the  possession  of  statuary, 
and  how  rich  even  second-class  towns  were  in 
this  species  of  embellishment.  As  to  Rome 
itself,  it  was  crowded  with  statues.  Every  open 
space  in  the  city  was  occupied  by  monumental 
figures  of  eminent  citizens,  and  the  Thermae, 
temples,  and  other  public  buildings  were  decorated 
by  the  spoils  of  many  a  Greek  city.  These  statues 
may  be  divided  into  three  classes — those  which 
were  dedicated  to  religion,  those  which  were 
erected  as  monuments  to  particular  persons,  and 
those  which  were  merely  ornamental.  With 
regard  to  the  first,  the  numerous  temples  were 
adorned  with  a  large  number  of  statues  repre- 
senting deities,  which  were  very  often  votive 
offerings ;  and  family  worship  also  had  its 
images,  generally  of  a  humbler  kind.  Nero, 
for  example,  like  Louis  XIV.,  was  superstitiously 
devoted  to  certain  images,  and  carried  about 
with  him  an  "icuncula  puellaris"  as  a  charm. 
Such  images  were  much  used  by  travellers  to 
protect  them  against  shipwreck.  The  second 
class  of  statues,  those  which  were  put  up  as  monu- 
ments, were  still  more  numerous  and  important. 


STATUES  OF  THE  EMPERORS.  Ill 

The  custom  of  erecting  statues  to  distinguished 
men  had  existed  at  Rome  for  a  long  time,  as  well 
as  that  of  filling  the  atrium  with  wax  masks 
representing  ancestors.  But  the  Empire  deve- 
loped the  usage  to  an  extent  unheard  of  before. 
The  statues  and  busts  of  the  emperors  alone 
were  visible  in  every  street,  and  almost  every 
house.  They  were  protected  by  the  most 
tyrannical  legislation,  so  that  to  mutilate  or 
destroy  one  of  them  was  a  crime  punished  by 
death,  and  even  to  strip  or  beat  a  slave  in  sight 
of  a  bust  of  the  emperor  might  be  made  a 
capital  offence.  Hence,  slaves  were  accustomed 
to  fly  for  refuge  to  these  statues,  and  the  tyranny 
of  the  Caesars  may  indirectly  have  saved  many 
slaves  from  the  fury  of  their  masters.  Not  only 
was  it  treason  to  shew  disrespect  to  the  image  of 
the  reigning  emperor,  but  those  of  his  prede- 
cessors who  had  obtained  divine  honours  were 
protected  with  the  same  severity.  A  few  of  the 
worst  tyrants,  however,  received  different  treat- 
ment. The  statues  and  busts  of  Nero  and 
Domitian  were  broken  and  hurled  down  by 
the  exulting  populace  immediately  after  their 
deaths,  so  that  very  few  representations  of  them 


112  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

remained.  The  same  posthumous  vengeance  was 
shewn  to  the  statues  of  Sejanus,  who  had  filled 
Rome  with  portrait-images  of  himself.  .In  a  few 
hours  after  the  death  of  the  detested  minister, 
the  face,  which  had  lately  been  the  second  in  the 
whole  world,  was  made  into  "  pitchers  and  pans 
and  kettles  and  pots."*  A  more  economical  but 
less  usual  plan  was  to  decapitate  the  statues  of 
the  deceased  emperor,  and  place  the  head  of  his 
successor  on  the  shoulders.  This,  however,  was 
deemed  disrespectful,  and  was  only  resorted  to  in 
rare  instances,  e.g.,  the  Colossus  of  Nero,  which 
bore  several  heads  before  Commodus  transformed 
it  into  a  Hercules,  after  his  own  likeness.  Statues 
of  private  persons,  both  living  and  dead,  were 
extremely  numerous.  In  republican  days  this 
had  been  a  distinction  ;  now  every  one  might 
have  a  statue,  and  if  he  had  no  friends  or  clients 
to  give  him  one  he  might  put  it  up  himself. 
Even  circus  jockeys  had  their  statues,  with  their 
horses  and  chariots.  The  Forum  became  so  full 
that  on  one  occasion  at  least  it  had  to  be  cleared. 
Absurd  as  this  custom  was,  it  must  have  added 
very  much  to  the  beauty  of  a  town,  provided  that 
the   statues  were  good,  as  they  generally  were. 

*  Juv.  10.  56,  &c. 


ORNAMENTAL  SCULPTURE.  113 

Statues  of  a  purely  ornamental  or  artistic  kind 
were  also  very  numerous.  It  was  this  kind  of 
sculpture  which  was  taken  in  such  quantities  from 
the  Greek  cities.  Some  of  the  emperors,  especi- 
ally Nero,  plundered  the  eastern  provinces  of 
their  works  of  art  to  a  shameful  extent,  the 
statues  being  used  partly  in  the  decoration  of  the 
palace  and  partly  in  that  of  baths,  theatres,  &c. 
Private  persons  were  equally  assiduous  in  collect- 
ing, and  no  wealthy  family  was  without  its  gallery 
of  sculpture.  Of  the  character  of  the  decorative 
statues  we  can  judge  from  those  which  have  been 
discovered ;  some,  perhaps  the  largest  number, 
represented  gods  or  mythological  scenes,  thus 
combining  religion  with  art,  as  in  modern  times ; 
others  were  studies  of  some  favourite  subject, 
such  as  a  boy  wrestling  with  a  goose,  or  an  athlete 
preparing  for  a  contest ;  the  majority  were  copies 
or  imitations  of  some  Greek  original.  The  wide 
diffusion  of  this  branch  of  art  is  quite  unparallelled 
in  later  times  ;  it  gave  all  classes  of  the  community 
the  advantages  which  are  now  confined  to  a  few, 
and  enabled  the  citizen  to  have  images  of  grace 
and  beauty  constantly  before  his  eyes. 
The  art  of  painting  was  less   exclusively  con- 

H 


114  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

fined  to  the  Greeks  than  that  of  sculpture. 
From  Fabius  Pictor,  the  historian,  downwards, 
several  Romans  painted,  and  lessons  in  drawing 
and  painting  were  given  in  high -class  schools. 
Unfortunately  very  little  of  ancient  pictorial  art 
has  been  preserved  -to  us.  We  have  enough  to 
make  us  deeply  regret  that  we  have  no  more,  but 
not  enough  to  give  us  a  clear  idea  of  the  charac- 
teristic features  of  classical  painting.  We  know, 
however,  that  it  was  as  widely  diffused  as  the  sister 
art,  and  that  Rome  was  full  of  pictures,  both  de- 
corative and  monumental.  Just  as  statues  were 
erected  to  commemorate  persons  and  events,  so 
pictures  were  publicly  exhibited  for  the  same  pur- 
pose. In  triumphs  and  public  celebrations  pictures 
always  formed  part  of  the  show.  It  is  charac- 
teristic of  the  Romans  that  pictorial  representations 
were  often  made  to  take  the  place  of  placards, 
advertisements,  and  votive  tablets.  Even  in  the 
law  court  one  of  the  parties  would  sometimes  pre- 
sent the  jury  with  a  series  of  pictures  to  illustrate 
the  disreputable  habits  of  his  opponent.  Beggars 
carried  large  boards  painted  with  the  history  of 
their  misfortunes — the  fire  or  the  shipwreck  which 
had  deprived  them  of  their  worldly  goods.    The 


PAINTING.  115 


temples  of  the  gods  were  full  of  votive  pictures,  so 
that  Isis,  who  saved  men  from  shipwreck,  was  the 
best  patroness  of  painters.  Private  houses  were 
always  decorated  with  graceful  wall-paintings  re- 
presenting scenes,  figures,  fruit  and  flowers,  or 
mere  patterns.  For  the  most  part  Roman  wall- 
decoration  seems  to  have  been  far  superior  to  ours, 
and  to  have  frequently  reached  a  high  degree  of 
artistic  beauty.  Many  admirable  pictures  were 
painted  on  house-walls,  or  worked  in  mosaic  on 
the  floor.  Another  use  of  painting  was  in  the 
illustration  of  books,  which  often  contained  a 
portrait  of  the  author  or  a  representation  of  his 
subject  on  the  title-page.  Portrait  painting  was 
very  common,  but  we  have  no  means  of  knowing 
whether  it  was  well  done  or  not.  It  appears  that 
painters  often  gratified  the  vanity  of  their  sitters 
by  improving  their  features  in  the  portrait.  We 
see  then  that  painting,  both  decorative  and  other- 
wise, was  as  universal  in  the  first  century  as  it  is 
now.  The  extent  of  the  art  is  the  more  remark- 
able, when  we  remember  that  the  Romans  had 
none  of  those  mechanical  aids — printing  of  wall- 
papers, engraving,  photography,  &c. — which  have 
so  largely  increased  the  number  of  artistic  designs 

H  2 


116  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

in  every  place  in  Europe.  It  is  improbable  that 
the  early  empire  surpassed  modern  Europe  in  the 
diffusion  of  painting,  since  these  aids  to  multipli- 
cation have  been  discovered ;  but  the  vast  quantity 
which  evidently  existed  speaks  highly  for  the 
artistic  energy  of  the  old  civilisation. 

Of  the  third  of  the  fine  arts,  music,  we  do  not 
propose  to  say  much.  Although  our  music  is,  to  a 
great  extent,  derived,  by  continuous  tradition,  from 
that  of  the  ancients,  there  is  a  wide  difference 
between  them.  Music,  among  the  Greeks  and 
Romans,  was  far  simpler  and  plainer,  and,  so  to 
speak,  less  ambitious.  A  piece  of  lyric  poetry  set 
to  music,  as  all  lyric  poetry  was  meant  to  be,  was 
not  disguised,  but  elucidated  by  the  tune.  The 
air  merely  brought  out  the  sense,  and  was  sub- 
servient to  it :  the  words  were  the  first  thing,  the 
music  the  second.  In  longer  pieces,  such  as  Ovid's 
Elegiacs,  which  were  sung  and  danced  to  at  the 
theatres,  the  music  must  have  been  a  mere  re- 
citative. We  have,  of  course,  no  examples  of 
ancient  music  to  judge  by,  but  to  all  appearance 
the  Italians  were  then,  as  now,  noted  for  their  fine 
ear  and  critical  appreciation  of  music.  The  chief 
instruments  used  were  the  lyre  and  the  flute,  each 


MUSIC.  117 

of  which  was  modified  in  several  different  forms. 
The  chief  places  where  music  was  performed  were 
the  theatres,  where  it  was  an  indispensable  part 
of  the  entertainment,  and  private  houses,  where 
trained  choirs  of  slaves  were  employed  to  sing  and 
play  to  the  guests  at  dinner,  or  for  the  delectation 
of  their  master  alone.  In  our  century  complaints, 
no  doubt  well  founded,  were  made  that  the  art  of 
music  was  being  corrupted  by  popular  innovations 
in  style,  and  still  more  by  the  sensual  character  of 
the  new  compositions,  which  pandered  to  the 
worst  tastes  of  the  populace.  Singers  and  players 
from  Spain  and  from  the  eastern  provinces  did 
much  to  spread  this  evil.  But  the  most  charac- 
teristic feature  of  our  period  is  not  the  degradation 
of  music,  but  the  abatement  of  the  national  pre- 
judice against  it.  In  republican  days  a  Roman 
would  have  been  ashamed  to  own  himself  a  skilled 
musician,  and  a  matron  would  have  considered 
such  an  accomplishment  highly  derogatory  to  her 
dignity.  Now  both  sexes  gave  themselves  to  a 
study  of  music  with  an  eagerness  which  did  not, 
indeed,  pass  unrebuked,  but  was  not  in  any  way 
checked  by  the  upholders  of  ancient  prejudices. 
Great,  indeed,  was  the  change  from  the  time  when 


118  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

Scipio  ^Emilianus  delivered  a  scathing  invective  in 
the  senate  against  schools  of  music  and  dancing, 
at  one  of  which  he  had  even  seen  the  son  of  a 
Roman  magistrate !  Now  music,  at  least,  was  part 
of  a  liberal  education,  and  probably  most  boys  of 
good  position  attended  lessons  in  singing  and  harp- 
playing.  Nero  was,  of  course,  the  greatest  patron 
of  the  art.  He,  in  fact,  was  so  completely  eman- 
cipated from  the  traditions  and  prejudices  of  his 
countrymen,  that  he  loved  best  to  pose  as  a  pro- 
fessional artist,  and  exhibited  his  skill  in  public, 
like  any  Greek  citharcedus.  This,  it  is  true,  gave 
the  greatest  offence,  but  the  enthusiasm  of  the 
emperor  for  music  gave  a  stimulus  to  the  practice 
of  the  art,  among  other  ways  by  leading  to  the 
foundation  of  a  musical  contest  held  at  Rome. 
Women  of  good  family  also  studied  music,  and 
even  composed  their  own  melodies.  So  far  had 
the  old  order  changed  under  the  influence  of  Greek 
manners  and  new  luxury  1 


(    119    ) 


CHAPTER  VI. 

— ♦— 

GRADES  OP  SOCIETY, 

We  propose  in  this  chapter  to  give  a  sketch  of  the 
component  parts  of  Roman  society,  from  the  palace 
to  the  hovel.  The  gradations  of  rank  were  always 
rather  strongly  marked  at  Rome,  and  the  taste  for 
external  decorations  was  kept  up  under  the  Empire 
as  much  as  under  the  Republic.  Hence,  in  spite 
of  the  democratic  basis  of  the  Empire,  there  were 
still  lines  of  demarcation  between  the  senator  and 
the  knight,  and  between  the  citizen  and  the  pro- 
vincial, as  well  as  the  broad  difference  between  the 
free-born  and  the  slave.  Between  the  magistrate 
at  Rome  and  his  porter  were  many  intermediate 
grades,  sharply  defined  in  theory,  though  often 
overstepped  in  practice.  It  will  be  well  to  take 
these  in  order,  noticing  on  the  way  whatever  seems 
interesting  or  characteristic  in  the  various  occupa- 
tions of  the  community. 
The  Caesars  had,  properly  speaking,  no  court. 


120  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

Their  households  resembled  those  of  ordinary 
Roman  nobles.  Such  system  of  etiquette  as  there 
was  was  only  designed  to  keep  out  intruders  from 
the  palace,  not  to  make  the  monarchy  more  im- 
posing. Hence  there  were  none  of  those  court 
officials  who  now  surround  every  palace — men  of 
noble  birth  who  feel  honoured  by  holding  some 
post  in  the  royal  household.  No  Caesar  employed 
senators  or  their  wives  to  perform  menial  offices 
for  him :  such  attendants  as  he  required  were 
chosen  from  the  class  of  slaves  or  freedmen.  Even 
honourable  and  responsible  posts,  such  as  that  of 
secretary,  were  filled  by  freedmen.  This  was  ex- 
clusively the  case  under  the  earlier  emperors,  but 
Tacitus*  says  that  Vitellius  in  his  short  reign  intro- 
duced the  innovation  of  employing  knights  for 
these  posts  instead  of  freedmen.  Vespasian  and 
Titus  may  have  followed  his  example,  but  Domitian 
appears  to  have  reverted  to  the  old  plan,  and  Spar- 
tianusf  says  that  Hadrian  was  the  first  to  employ 
a  knight  as  secretary.  We  must,  then,  remember 
that  the  permanent  posts  about  the  palace  were 
held  by  men  of  low  extraction,  who  had  generally 
once  been  slaves.    These  freedmen  had  generally 

*  Tac.  H.  1.  58.  t  Spartian.  Hadr.  58. 


CAESARS  HOUSEHOLD.  121 

gained  their  advancement  by  their  own  qualities. 
Under  good  emperors  they  were  often  able  and 
trustworthy  men ;  under  the  worst,  they  were 
often  the  vilest  of  their  sex.  In  either  case  a  pre- 
carious but  very  great  power  was  in  their  hands, 
and  they  often  amassed  fortunes  unheard  of  before, 
and  hardly  equalled  anywhere  until  the  present 
century.  Pallas  had  three  hundred  millions  of 
sesterces,  Narcissus  four  hundred  millions ;  and 
others  became  nearly  as  rich.  The  chief  offices  at 
court  which  we  hear  of  are  the  control  of  the 
accounts  (a  rationibus),  that  of  petitions  (a 
libellis),  and  the  post  of  private  secretary  (ab 
epistulis).  Important  administrative  offices  were 
usually  given  to  men  of  higher  rank,  particularly 
to  the  knights.  The  freedmen  who  attained  high 
posts  were  generally  Greeks,  rarely  Syrians,  Egyp- 
tians, or  Gauls. 

The  court  ceremonial  was,  as  we  have  said, 
very  slight.  It  chiefly  consisted  in  the  morning 
visit  of  the  emperor's  friends,  a  custom  which  was 
by  no  means  confined  to  the  court,  but  was  prac- 
tised habitually  by  the  friends  and  clients  of 
wealthy  nobles.  The  only  difference  was  that 
owing  to  the  crowds  of  persons  who  wished  to 


122  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

pay  their  respects  to  the  emperor  it  was  necessary 
to  have  guards  round  the  gates,  and  to  search 
visitors  who  might  be  suspected  of  meditating 
treason.  Even  these  precautions  were  not  always 
adopted.  Generally  speaking  those  only  might 
call  in  this  way  who  were  included  in  the  list  of 
the  emperor's  "friends,"  a  term  which  came  to 
have  a  very  definite  signification.  The  "  friends  " 
of  the  emperor  were  divided  into  three  classes,  of 
which  the  first  consisted  of  senators  and  other 
magnates,  the  second  chiefly  of  knights  and 
others  of  a  less  exalted  station  than  the  first  class, 
while  the  third  contained  persons  who  had  won 
favour  with  the  emperor  by  their  own  gifts — 
poets,  rhetoricians,  philosophers,  and  such  like. 
Sometimes  a  token  was  given  to  these  privileged 
persons,  by  which  they  might  gain  admittance. 
This  institution  of  "  friends  "  was  also  a  develop- 
ment of  a  republican  custom.  Both  in  these 
morning  visits,  and  when  dining  with  the  em- 
peror, the  toga  was  always  worn. 

Leaving  the  palace,  we  come  next  to  the  Senate, 
that  once  august  assembly  which  might  boast  the 
proudest  traditions  of  any  aristocratic  body  in  the 
world.    The  old  families,  whose  names  appeared 


THE  SENATE.  123 


so  often  in  the  consular  Fasti,  had  most  of  them 
died  out  before  the  end  of  our  period.  Civil  war, 
proscriptions,  and  celibacy,  had  made  sad  havoc  of 
their  ranks  before  the  beginning  of  the  century, 
and  the  decay  went  on  even  in  the  peaceful  reigns 
which  followed.  Their  places  were  filled  by  new 
men  of  various  classes.  Some  were  knights  of 
good  parentage,  promoted  according  to  custom  to 
the  superior  rank ;  others  were  obscure  citizens 
whom  fortune  or  merit  had  advanced ;  others 
were  Italians  and  even  provincials.  Julius  Caesar 
bore  the  reproach  of  being  the  first  to  introduce 
trousered  Gauls  into  the  Senate,  but  his  example 
was  followed  by  his  successors,  and  the  "  right  of 
senatorship "  became  a  coveted  privilege  in  pro- 
vincial towns.  Even  sons  of  freedmen  had 
become  senators  before  the  reign  of  Nero,  who 
tried  in  vain  to  stop  the  abuse.  Before  the  end 
of  the  century  many  senatorial  families  were  of 
servile  descent.  The  means  by  which  these 
parvenus  made  their  way  into  the  senate  were, 
of  course,  very  various.  Military  reputation  was, 
perhaps,  the  rarest  and  most  honourable.  Per- 
sonal services  to  the  emperor,  among  which  the 
most  common  was  the  infamous  trade  of  informer, 


124  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

were  an  easier  and  more  usual  road  to  rank 
and  dignity.  The  influx  of  these  new  men  did 
not  at  all  diminish  the  respect  with  which  society 
regarded  such  of  the  old  families  as  still  survived. 
Indeed,  the  tendency  was  to  pay  an  exaggerated 
deference  to  noble  birth,  and  to  excuse  in  an 
^Emilius  or  Silanus  faults  which  would  have  been 
fatal  to  the  reputation  of  an  ordinary  man. 
Juvenal  in  one  of  his  best  known  satires,  bears 
testimony  to  the  absurd  respect  paid  to  old 
families,  whose  halls  were  full  of  the  battered  and 
blackened  effigies  of  republican  heroes,  and 
adorned  with  pedigrees  reaching  even  to  Olympus. 
His  vigorous  assertions  "  miserum  est  aliorum 
incumbere  famae,"  "  nobilitas  sola  est  atque  unica 
virtus,"  only  shew  how  far  the  contrary  opinion 
prevailed  in  the  vulgar  mind.  Additional  testi- 
mony to  the  interest  taken  in  genealogies  is 
furnished  by  the  records  of  books  on  the  subject. 
Varro  wrote  a  treatise  on  those  families  which 
claimed  Trojan  descent.  Atticus  had  explored 
the  antiquities  of  noble  families.  Messala,  under 
Augustus,  wrote  on  the  same  subject.  Nor  did 
the  taste  wane  in  the  next  generation.  We  hear 
of  fictitious  genealogies  being   manufactured    for 


THE  SENATE.  125 


nouveaax  riches  ;  and  Vespasian  on  his  accession 
found  flatterers  anxious  to  make  him  a  pedigree. 
Senators  of  old  family,  who  had  become  so  em- 
poverished  as  no  longer  to  possess  the  "  senatorial 
census"  of  1,200,000  sesterces,  were  often  sub- 
sidized from  the  Imperial  exchequer  to  save  them 
from  losing  their  rank.  The  sons  of  men  of 
"  senatorial  family  "  became  senators  as  matter  of 
of  course,  and  the  old  custom  of  allowing  them  as 
children  to  attend  the  debates  with  their  fathers 
was  revived.  By  degrees  the  Senate  became  a 
kind  of  hereditary  peerage,  instead  of  the  selected 
body  of  former  days.*  The  dignity  of  the  senator 
was  kept  up  by  several  external  privileges.  He 
was  distinguished  by  the  broad  purple  border  of 
his  toga,  and  by  his  black  sandals  adorned  by  a 
silver  crescent ;  special  seats  were  reserved  for 
his  order  at  the  public  games,  and  he  might  dine 
in  the  Capitol  at  the  public  expense.  But  much 
of  his  consideration  doubtless  rested  on  the 
wealth  which  he  usually  possessed.  The  limit  of 
1,200,000  sesterces  was  intended  to  exclude  poor 
men  from  the  order,  but  in  most  cases  senators 

*  This  change  was,  of  course,  not  consummated  till  long  after 
the  first  century. 


126  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

possessed  many  times  that  modest  sum.  Many 
of  them  were  owners  of  immense  estates  or  mines 
in  the  provinces.  In  Nero's  reign  half  the  pro- 
vince of  Africa  belonged  to  six  great  landlords. 
On  the  other  hand,  they  were  forbidden  to  increase 
their  capital  by  trade  or  commerce  of  any  kind, 
so  that  it  was  not  easy  for  them  to  recover  from 
any  pecuniary  loss.  This  gave  some  excuse  for 
the  assistance  given  them  in  such  cases  by  the 
emperor,  which  was  sometimes  supplemented  by 
the  generosity  of  their  own  order.  The  calls 
upon  their  purse  were  also  very  heavy.  House- 
rent  in  the  fashionable  quarters  of  Rome  was  very 
high,  and  a  considerable  amount  of  state  had  to 
be  kept  up,  including  generally  an  army  of  clients 
and  poor  dependants,  who  stuck  like  leeches  to 
their  rich  patron.  Public  life  was  also  very 
burdensome  with  its  shows  and  games  and  other 
expenses  for  the  benefit  of  the  people  ;  so  that  we 
are  not  surprised  to  find  that  senatorial  families 
were  often  in  difficulties. 

Before  going  on  to  the  knights,  the  second  order 
in  the  state,  we  should  mention  the  high  honours 
paid  to  the  consuls  and  other  great  magistrates. 
Although  shorn  of  all  real  power,  these  republican 


TEE  CONSULS.  127 


dignities  were  as  much  prized  as  when  Rome  was 
a  free  state.  Even  the  custom  of  appointing 
several  consuls  in  one  year  did  not  materially 
lessen  the  estimation  in  which  the  honour  was 
held.  The  magistrate  during  his  year  of  office 
was  looked  up  to  and  revered  as  much  as  if  he 
were  still  the  holder  of  real  authority,  and  on  his 
part  he  was  expected  to  do  nothing  which  could 
compromise  the  dignity  of  his  office.  We  are  sur- 
prised at  the  energy  with  which  Juvenal  declaims 
against  the  consul  who  drove  his  chariot  himself 
"  in  the  night  indeed,  but  under  the  accusing  eyes 
of  the  stars."  The  higher  priesthoods  were  re- 
garded with  as  much  ambition  as  the  civil  magis- 
tracies, with  which  they  were  often  conjoined. 

The  knights  were  less  successful  in  preserving 
the  dignity  of  their  order  than  the  senators.  On 
account  of  their  numbers,  which  were  not  limited 
like  that  of  the  senate,  it  was  not  difficult  for 
persons  to  assume  the  insignia  of  a  knight  with- 
out proper  title,  and  the  emperors  helped  towards 
the  degradation  of  the  order  by  allowing  even 
slaves  on  manumission  to  wear  the  gold  ring.* 

*  See  an  interesting  collection  of  passages  bearing  on  this  sub- 
ject in  Mayor's  Juvenal,  note  on  Satire  7.  16. 


128  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

In  fact  the  ordo  equester  was  becoming  merged  in 
the  main  body  of  citizens,  though  the  fusion  did 
not  take  place  till  after  our  period.  Except  at  Rome, 
the  knights  were  of  course  the  highest  rank,  and 
the  law  which  limited  the  dignity  to  persons  pos- 
sessed of  more  than  400,000  sesterces  seems  to 
have  been  generally  observed.  Many  families, 
both  at  Rome  and  in  the  principal  towns,  were 
hereditary  knights,  and  these  were  accustomed  to 
look  down  upon  those  who  had  obtained  the  dig- 
nity by  military  adventure  or  the  gift  of  fortune. 
The  knights  still  monopolised  the  lucrative  financial 
posts  which  had  belonged  to  them  under  the 
Republic,  and  many  of  them  exercised  those  com- 
mercial professions  from  which  the  senators  were 
by  law  debarred.  Hence  some  knights  preferred 
to  remain  in  the  second  order  when  they  might 
have  entered  the  senate,  and  this  choice,  which  was 
dictated  sometimes  by  economy,  and  sometimes 
by  love  of  ease  and  want  of  ambition,  was  praised 
as  moderation.  Maecenas  is  the  best  known  instance 
of  a  distinguished  man  who  refused  senatorial  rank, 
but  he  appears  to  have  had  many  imitators.  These 
knights  with  senatorial  census  were  formed  into  a 
distinct  class,  and  were  called  equites  insignes,  splen- 


THE  LEARNED  PROFESSIONS.  129 

didi,  or  illustres.  It  does  not  appear  that  all  knights 
with  the  higher  census  were  equites  illustres,  but 
only  those  on  whom  the  honour  was  conferred 
by  the  emperor.  They  were  even  to  be  allowed  to 
wear  the  latus  clavus  like  senators.  This  tended 
still  further  to  lower  the  main  body  of  the  knights, 
who  possessed  only  the  property  qualification. 

We  now  come  to  the  professional  class  in  the 
Roman  community.  The  doctors,  schoolmasters, 
lecturers,  and  professors  of  the  capital  were  gene- 
rally Greeks,  who,  in  fact,  monopolised  to  a  great 
extent  all  the  learned  professions  with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  bar.  Some  of  these  Greeks  were  of 
servile  extraction  ;  others  had  come  over  to  Rome 
for  the  sake  of  profit  and  fame.  Some  were  even 
actually  slaves,  whose  fees  and  payments  belonged 
de  jure  to  their  master,  though  they  were  often 
allowed  to  retain  part  of  them  as  peculium.  This, 
to  some  extent,  lowered  the  estimation  of  the 
learned  professions,  and  deterred  citizens  of  good 
family  from  entering  them — one  of  the  unhappy 
consequences  of  slavery.  The  bar  was,  as  we 
have  said,  the  chief  exception.  The  profession  of 
advocate  was  one  of  ths  chief  roads  to  success 
open  to  the  aspiring  young  Roman.    His  educa- 

] 


130  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

tion  had  been  largely  directed  to  the  art  of 
rhetoric,  and  the  fame  of  the  orator  was  the  most 
common  object  of  ambition  in  his  class.  As  a  rule 
he  did  not  trouble  himself  much  with  the  intrica- 
cies of  the  law,  but  gave  his  whole  attention  to 
public  speaking.  It  often  happened  that  an  advo- 
cate had  no  special  knowledge  of  the  legal  ques- 
tion at  issue,  but  trusted  entirely  to  his  eloquence 
to  win  him  his  case.  We  shall  be  less  surprised 
at  this  when  we  remember  the  great  latitude 
allowed  to  pleaders  in  ancient  times,  and  the 
prominence  in  all  the  extant  speeches  of  invective 
and  declamation  as  compared  with  legal  argument 
and  evidence.  It  was  customary,  however,  for 
the  orator  to  retain  the  services  of  a  pragftiaticus, 
a  lawyer  of  lower  grade  in  estimation,  who  was 
prepared  to  give  advice  on  legal  questions. 

The  best  days  of  Roman  oratory  were  passed 
when  Augustus  made  himself  master  of  the  Em- 
pire. Rome  never  produced  a  second  Cicero,  or 
even  a  second  Hortensius.  This  falling  off  was 
partly  due  to  the  loss  of  liberty  that  attended  the 
end  of  the  republic,  but  partly,  also,  to  the  in- 
creased difficulty  with  which  a  poor  and  unknown 
man  could  make  his  way  to  the  front.    Juvenal* 

*  Satire  7. 


THE  BAR.  131 

declares  indignantly  that  in  his  day  even  Cicero 
would  not  earn  two  pounds  at  the  bar  unless  he 
wore  a  large  and  conspicuous  gold  ring.  The  man 
who  wishes  to  succeed,  he  says,  must  be  seen  in 
the  streets,  borne  in  a  litter  by  a  number  of  young 
Medes,  making  purchases  of  plate  and  "murra" 
vases  and  beautiful  slaves ;  he  must  wear  a 
brilliant  robe  of  purple,  and  live  in  a  splendid 
house  with  an  equestrian  statue  of  himself  in  the 
vestibule.  Such  a  man  may  demand  the  highest 
price  allowed  by  law  for  his  pleading ;  but 
eloquence  is  rarely  found,  he  says,  with  a  thread- 
bare coat.  While  an  ^Emilius,  with  his  noble 
name  and  his  wealth,  can  ask  10,000  sesterces  for 
a  single  pleading,  the  poor  and  obscure  orator  can 
only  get  one  aureus  for  four,  and  even  that  is  re- 
duced by  the  attorney's  fees.  A  jockey  at  the 
circus  could  make  more  than  a  hundred  pleaders. 
We  can  hardly  be  surprised  if  some  of  these  ill-paid 
barristers  were  led  to  take  up  questionable  cases 
and  to  endeavour  to  make  a  name  by  quackery. 
It  does  not  appear  that  the  first  ever  caused  much 
scruple  to  a  Roman  lawyer,  nor  should  we  con- 
demn, in  the  circumstances,  the  deception  of 
wearing  a  hired  ring  to  give  the  appearance  of 
1  2 


132  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

wealth,  nor  the  custom  of  employing  claqueurs  to 
applaud  the  good  points  of  a  speech.  If  success 
as  a  pleader  was  once  achieved  the  orator's  pros- 
pects were  very  brilliant.  Some  of  the  most 
prominent  "  new  men,"  both  in  our  century  and 
in  that  which  preceded  it,  owed  their  elevation  to 
this  cause.  The  name  of  the  famous  advocate 
was  on  everyone's  lips ;  his  house  was  besieged 
by  friends  and  clients,  and  he  might  make  a  large 
fortune  by  his  practice.* 

In  fact  the  legal  profession  was  generally  looked 
upon  as  a  lucrative  one.  Martial  is  advised  by  a 
friend  to  plead  instead  of  writing  poetry,  in  order 
to  make  his  fortune.!  The  poet  gives. the  same 
advice  to  Valerius  Flaccus.;}:  These  statements  are 
not  at  all  incompatible  with  the  lugubrious  account 
of  Juvenal.  The  successful  pleaders  were  few, 
the  "briefless  barristers"  were  many.  For  these 
last  it  might  be  the  best  chance  to  follow  the 
poet's  advice,  and  leaving  the  ungrateful  capital  to 
seek  an  opening  in  Gaul  or  Africa,  or  even  among 

*  Some  interesting  facts  on  this  head  are  given  by  Tacitus. 
Dial,  de  Orat. 

f  Mart.  1.  17,  "  Et  dicit  mihi  saepe,  Magna  res  est."  See  also 
2.  30,  "  Dives  eris,  si  causas  egeris,  inquit." 

%  Mart.  1.  76.  13,  "Illic"  (in  the  Forum)  "a?ra  sonant:"  &c. 


POSITION  OF  ADVOCATES.  133 

the  Britons,  who  were  learning  eloquence  from 
the  ready-tongued  Gauls.*  The  other  alternative 
was  to  stay  at  home  and  eke  out  the  profits  of 
pleading  by  giving  lectures.  Those  who  were  less 
successful  as  pleaders  sometimes  made  a  reputa- 
tion as  teachers  of  rhetoric,  and  we  hear  of  dis- 
tinguished advocates  giving  instruction  in  oratory 
after  ceasing  to  practise.  We  shall  probably  come 
to  the  conclusion  that  except  for  the  greater  im- 
portance attached  at  Rome  to  the  study  of 
eloquence,  the  conditions  of  the  legal  profession 
bore  a  close-  resemblance  to  the  state  of  things  at 
the  present  day. 

If  we  turn  to  the  profession  of  teaching,  we 
shall  find  that  it  ranked  rather  lower  at  Rome 
than  in  most  civilised  societies.  It  was  the  same 
at  Athens.  Demosthenes,  when  he  is  drawing 
contrasts  to  his  own  advantage  between  iEschines 
and  himself,  makes  it  his  climax,  "  You  were 
teaching  grammar,  while  /  was  a  schoolboy." 
"  What  an  unworthy  thing  to  do  ! "  exclaims 
Annius  Floras,  "  how  patiently  you  endure  sitting 
in  school  and  teaching  boys ! "  The  causes  of  this 
disparagement  of  the  profession  were  probably  the 

*  Juv.  15.  112  ;  7.  148. 


134  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

servile  associations  of  the  pozdagogi,  the  small  pay* 
and  the  generally  small  acquirements  of  the 
schoolmasters  at  Rome.  The  social  position  of 
the  schoolmaster  began  to  improve  at  the  end  of 
the  republic.  Plotius  was  the  first  Roman  teacher 
of  rhetoric,  in  Cicero's  boyhood.*  Seneca  men- 
tions Blandus,  a  Roman  knight,  as  the  teacher  of 
Fabianus,  adding,  however,  that  "  before  him  this 
most  noble  profession  had  been  left  to  freedmen, 
and  there  was  a  strange  idea  that  it  was  disgraceful 
to  teach  what  it  was  honourable  to  learn."  By 
the  time  of  Juvenal  it  had  become  one  of  the  re- 
cognised careers  for  a  Roman  of  the  middle  class. 
With  regard  to  the  profits  of  the  profession,  it  was 
a  subject  of  complaint  in  Ovid's  time — 

"  Nee  vos  turba  deam  censu  fraudata  magistri 
Spemite." 

and  matters  do  not  seem  to  have  improved  much 
for  teachers  in  the  first  century,  a.d.  Juvenal 
says  that  the  yearly  fee  (not  "  income "  surely,  as 
Mayor  ad  loc.)  of  a  grammarian  was  only  that 
which  a  jockey  received  for  a  single  race.  This 
was  one  "  aureus,"  a  sum  which  is  very  small  of 

*  Gellius  (15.  11)  quotes  a  most  characteristic  censorial  edict 
against  Latin  "  rhetors,"  published  in  92  B.C. 


TROUBLES  OF  SCHOOLMASTERS.  135 

course,  but  which  would  mean  a  competence  if  the 
class  was  large.  The  picture  which  he  draws  of 
the  life  of  a  teacher  is  certainly  unpleasant  enough. 
Besides  the  monotony  of  teaching  the  same  things 
again  and  again,  and  the  anxiety  of  the  moral 
supervision  of  a  number  of  boys,  it  appears  that 
parents  often  tried  to  evade  payment  of  the  fee  on 
pretence  that  the  boy  had  learned  nothing. 

"  Kara  tamen  merces  quae  cognitione  tribuni 

Non  egeat." 
"  Mercedem  appellas  ?     Quid  enim  scio  1 "  &c. 

The  grammarian  was  also  liable  to  be  pestered  by 
questions  intended  to  test  his  knowledge.  He 
could  not  walk  to  the  baths  without  meeting  parents 
and  others  who  accosted  him  with  such  questions 
as  "  Who  was  Hecuba's  mother  ? "  "  What  was 
the  name  of  the  nurse  of  Anchises  ?"  "What  was 
the  tune  that  the  Sirens  used  to  sing  ?  "  Ignorance 
of  these  important  facts  might  lose  him  a  pupil  or 
give  the  parent  an  excuse  for  withholding  his  fee. 
He  had  also,  it  appears,  to  put  up  with  insults 
from  his  class,  who  gave  him  nicknames,  and  even 
struck  him.*  It  was  the  custom  to  begin  work 
very  early  in  the  morning,  even  before  it  was  light, 
so  that  idle  citizens  were  disturbed  in  their  repose 

*  Juv.  7.  217. 


136  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

by  the  sounds  of  the  class — the  "verba  et  verbera  " 
with  which  knowledge  was  driven  into  the  head 
of  the  "Arcadian  youth."*  But  these  trials  were 
not  always  without  their  compensations.  In  par- 
ticular, the  teacher  of  rhetoric,  who  ranked  gene- 
rally higher  than  the  mere  grammarian,  sometimes 
made  a  good  income  from  his  profession.  Good 
fortune,  like  that  of  Verrius  Flaccus,  who  was  em- 
ployed by  Augustus  to  teach  his  grandchildren  at 
a  salary  of  26,000  sesterces,  was,  of  course,  rare; 
but  we  have  instances  of  masters  who  made  a 
much  larger  income.  Quintilian,  for  example,  had 
several  parksf  ;  Remmius  Palaemon  drew  from  his 
school  no  less  than  400,000  sesterces  a  year,;}:  and 
other  instances  of  successful  teachers  might  be 
quoted.§  On  the  whole,  however,  the  profession 
of  teaching  was  a  good  deal  less  remunerative  than 
that  of  the  law. 

Of  the  literary  profession,  which  shares  with  the 
law  and  the  school  the  Seventh  Satire  of  Juvenal, 
we  do  not  intend  to  say  much  here.    The  restric- 

*  Juv.  7.  225.  160.     Mart.  9.  30.  12.  57.  9.  68. 
t  Juv.  7.  189. 
X  Suet.  Gr.  111.  23. 

§  Teachers  of  arithmetic  and  book-keeping  generally  had  larger 
classes  than  grammarians.     Mart.  10.  62.  4  ;  Hor.  A.  P.  325,  &c. 


THE  LITERARY  PROFESSION.  137 

tions  and  dangers  which  surrounded  the  poet  and 
historian  belong  to  the  subject  of  politics;  the 
character  of  their  productions  will  be  more  fitly- 
treated  under  the  head  of  culture.  Juvenal  of 
course  treats  the  matter  from  the  pecuniary  point 
of  view,  which  is  the  subject  of  his  satire.  He 
complains  of  the  want  of  patronage  extended  to 
authors  by  the  rich  and  great,  and  contrasts  the 
unhappy  condition  of  the  poet  in  his  time  with  the 
honours  and  wealth  lavished  upon  Virgil.^There 
was  probably  some  reason  in  the  complaint,  though 
the  greatest  authors  have  generally  shewn  them- 
selves indifferent  about  profit.  Martial  speaks 
quite  in  the  same  strain  of  the  stinginess  of  his 
patrons.  This  hunting  for  gifts  and  pensions  sounds 
rather  sordid  to  us ;  but  we  must  remember  that  a 
writer  could  hardly  earn  a  competence  by  the  mere 
sale  of  his  books.  The  relations  between  author 
and  publisher  at  Rome  are  somewhat  obscure, 
but  it  does  not  appear  that  the  author  often  got 
a  good  bargain.  In  fact  we  do  not  know  of  any 
case  in  which  payment  for  copyright  is  mentioned. 
Pliny  was  surprised  to  hear  that  copies  of  his 
works  were  being  sold  at  Lugdunum.*  Martial,  on 
*  Ep.  9.  11. 


138  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

the  other  hand,  urges  a  stingy  friend  to  buy,  rather 
than  to  borrow,  his  Epigrams.*  The  price  of  books 
was  so  small  that  neither  author  nor  publisher 
could  have  made  much  profit.  We  hear  of  a 
volume  of  Martial  being  offered  for  about  four- 
pence,  while  a  handsomely  bound  copy  could  be 
had  for  five  denarii.f 

In  most  cases  the  author  did  not  attempt  to 
make  a  profit  by  selling  copies  of  his  works,  but 
looked  to  his  patrons  and  friends,  and  especially  to 
the  emperor,  for  remuneration.  This  unsatisfactory 
arrangement  is  responsible  for  much  of  the  syco- 
phancy and  adulation  which  disgraces  Roman 
literature.  In  our  period,  even  this  expedient  was 
seldom  successful,  and  the  author  who  had  only 
his  pen  to  depend  upon  was  usually  in  great 
poverty.  It  is  very  noteworthy  that  no  one  was 
too  proud  to  accept  direct  pecuniary  assistance. 
Pliny  not  only  sent  Martial  "  viaticum  "  for  his  last 
journey  to  Spain,  but  gave  a  present  of  between 
three  and  four  hundred  pounds  to  Quintilian,  who 
was  not  at  all  a  poor  man.  In  spite,  however,  of 
the  smallness  of  the  profit,  authors  were  naturally 
proud  of  their  profession,  and  not  inclined  to  ex- 

*  Mart.  1.  117.  f  Mart-  1-  118- 


THE  ARMY.  139 


change  it  for  the  more  lucrative  occupations  of  the 
advocate  or  the  vine  grower.* 

The  army  sometimes  opened  a  career  for  young 
men  of  good  family.  The  knights  in  particular 
often  entered  a  profession  where  their  rank  ensured 
them  favour  and  promotion.f  They  were  appointed 
to  the  command  of  a  cohort,  or  even  of  a  legion, 
without  much  merit  or  exertion  on  their  part.J 
Men  of  the  third  order  seldom  rose  higher  than 
the  post  of  centurion  or  military  tribune.  The 
army  had,  however,  other  attractions  besides  the 
chances  of  high  promotion.  It  still  enjoyed  a  good 
deal  of  social  consideration,  and  the  immense  power 
which  it  now  possessed  collectively  gave  a  good 
deal  of  prestige  and  influence  to  its  individual 
members.  The  immunity  enjoyed  by  the  soldier 
for  deeds  of  violence  is  a  frequent  subject  of  com- 
plaint. Soldiers  frequently  insulted,  assaulted,  and 
robbed  peaceable  citizens  with  impunity.  "  It  is 
easier,"  says  a  contemporary  writer,  "  to  get  a  false 
verdict  against  a  civilian  than  a  true  one  against  a 
soldier."  The  officers,  too,  might  obtain  lucrative 
posts.     Besides  the  most  dignified,  and  probably 

*  Mart.  1.  17.      f  Juv.  1.  58,  "  Cui  fas  curam  sperare  cohortis." 
%  Cf.  Hor.,  "  Quod  mihi  pareret  legio  Romana  tribune"    This, 

however,  was  more  characteristic  of  the  civil  wars  than  of  the 

Empire. 


140  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

richest  offices,  such  as  Prefect  of  public  safety, 
Superintendent  of  the  corn  distribution,  Governor 
of  Egypt,  and  Prefect  of  the  Praetorian  camp, 
there  were  minor  financial  posts  which  it  was 
now  customary  to  give  to  officers.  These  prizes 
of  the  profession  were,  of  course,  almost  mono- 
polised by  the  knights. 

Farming  was  rather  an  occupation  than  a  pro- 
fession for  the  better  class.  In  spite  of  the  old 
honourable  traditions  of  the  citizen-farmer,  agri- 
culture did  not  hold  out  sufficient  inducements 
either  socially  or  pecuniarily  to  tempt  many  to 
give  up  the  amusements  and  society  of  the  capital. 
It  is  true  that  Martial,  in  one  place,  says  "  Res 
magna  est  Tite,  quam  facit  colonus,"  but  elsewhere 
he  laughs  at  farmers  who  have  to  buy  even  their 
garden  produce  at  Rome."* 

The  profession  of  medicine,  though  often  very 
lucrative,  did  not  rank  so  high  socially  as  in 
modern  times.     Its  practice  was  almost  confined 

*  We  do  not  forget  the  maxim  of  Cato,  that  the  most  lucrative 
profession  is  "  bene  pascere  ;  "  the  next,  "  to  be  a  tolerable  gra- 
zier ; "  and  the  third,  "to  be  a  mediocre  grazier  : "  but  in  our 
period  sheep-farms  were  managed  without  the  personal  superin- 
tendence of  their  owner,  and  thus  could  not  be  said  to  make 
him  a  profession.  Cato's  remark  is  also  directed  against  corn- 
farming. 


MEDICINE.  141 


to  foreigners,*  and  was  to  a  large  extent  in  the 
hands  of  freedmen,  and  even  of  slaves.  The 
oriental  provinces  of  the  empire  supplied  the 
greatest  number  of  physicians  and  surgeons. 
Most  of  the  celebrated  practitioners  whose  names 
have  come  down  to  us  have  Greek  names ; 
but  we  hear  Egyptians  and  Syrians  spoken  of  as 
skilful  doctors,  and  not  a  few,  such  as  Antonius 
Musa  under  Augustus,  and  Vettius  Valens  under 
Claudius,  were  either  freedmen  with  Italian  names 
or  actually  Romans  of  pure  blood.  The  old 
practice  had  been  for  wealthy  families  to  keep 
slaves  skilled  in  the  medical  art,  who  prescribed 
for  themselves  and  their  households,  and  brought 
additional  profit  to  their  owners  by  practising  for 
pay  in  other  houses.  In  the  time  of  the  empire, 
though  many  able  physicians  and  surgeons 
belonged  to  this  class,  the  majority  had  a  more 
independent  position.  We  hear  frequently  of 
"  family  doctors,"  who  were  paid  a  fixed  sum 
annually  for  their  attendance  and  advice,  and  of 
distinguished  physicians  who  combined  teaching 
with  their  practice,  and  paid  their  visits  attended 

*  Cf.  Plin.  N.  H.  29.  11,  "Solam  hanc  Grsecarum  artium  non- 
dum  exercet  Romana  gravitas." 


142  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

by  a  troop  of  students.  These  successful  doctors 
often  made  large  fortunes,  larger  probably  than 
even  a  brilliant  advocate.  The  elder  Pliny*  men- 
tions by  name  five  who  in  his  day  made  250,000 
sesterces  (about  ^2,000)  a  year.  He  also  tells 
us  that|  Stertinius  made  a  favour  of  accepting  the 
post  of  court  physician  to  Claudius  at  a  salary  of 
500,000  sesterces,  since  he  might  have  made 
600,000  by  private  practice.  This  distinguished 
practitioner  and  his  brother  left  behind  them 
conjointly  the  sum  of  30  millions  of  sesterces, 
though  they  had  made  large  donations  in 
their  lifetime  to  the  city  of  Naples.  A  little 
further  on  he  tells  us  of  another,  Crinas  of  Mar- 
seilles, who  after  an  open-handed  life  left  ten 
millions,  while  a  less  fortunate  surgeon  was 
mulcted  in  that  sum  by  the  Emperor  Claudius. 
A  few  instances  of  exorbitant  fees  have  come 
down  to  us.  Pliny  mentions  200,000  sesterces 
being  paid  by  an  ex-praetor  afflicted  with  leprosy ; 
but  he  does  not  say  how  long  the  treatment  was 
continued.  There  is  no  direct  evidence  as  to  the 
ordinary  amount  of  a  doctor's  fee.  It  does  not 
appear  that  any  precautions  were  taken  by  law  to 

*  Plin.  H.  N.  29.  5.  f  M.  8,  9. 


FORTUNES  MADE  BY  PHYSICIANS.        143 

prevent  incompetent  and  disreputable  persons 
from  offering  their  services  as  physicians  or 
surgeons.  The  profession  was  often  entered 
without  any  further  qualification  than  an  agree- 
able manner  and  a  supply  of  effrontery.  Men 
left  other  professions  to  take  up  medicine  without 
any  special  preparation  for  the  science,  and  suc- 
ceeded or  failed  according  to  the  popular  verdict 
on  their  powers.  It  is  not  to  be  wondered  at, 
that  in  these  circumstances  a  great  deal  of 
quackery  and  not  a  little  crime  was  found  in 
the  ranks  of  the  profession.  Doctors  were  fre- 
quently accused  of  gross  incompetence,  of  im- 
proper familiarity  with  their  female  patients,  and 
even  of  poisoning  for  their  own  sakes  or  for 
money.  The  famous  Hippocratic  oath,  which  so 
nobly  sets  forth  the  duty  of  a  high-minded  votary 
of  iEsculapius,  was  hardly  in  accordance  with 
the  practice  of  the  majority  of  Roman  doctors. 
Pliny  complains  that  surgeons  try  experiments  on 
their  patients,  and  that  a  doctor  is  the  only  man 
who  may  kill  people  with  impunity. 

It  may  be  doubted  whether  medical  science 
advanced  much  in  this  period.  Ancient  surgeons 
seem  always  to  have  been  prone  to  the  use  of 


144  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

the  knife  and  cautery.  Archagathus,  one  of  the 
first  Greek  physicians  who  came  to  Rome,  was 
especially  notorious  for  his  cruelty.  Some  of  the 
prescriptions  which  have  come  down  to  us  sound 
as  absurd  as  those  of  the  middle  ages.  Modern 
physicians  would  probably  shake  their  heads  at 
the  cold  water  cure  of  Antonius  Musa,  which  is 
said  to  have  saved  Augustus'  life,  and  probably 
destroyed  that  of  Marcellus :  a  mixture  of  salt 
and  vinegar  is  ordered  for  quinsy,  and  gout  is 
treated  with  an  application  of  goat's  feet  to  the 
chest,  and  a  diet  of  frogs  cooked  in  oil.  Specialism, 
however,  was  carried  to  a  great  extent.  We  hear 
of  doctors  for  both  sexes,  of  dentists,  oculists, 
ear-doctors,  &c.  Various  schools  of  medicine  are 
also  mentioned,  among  which  we  may  mention  the 
"Wine-givers,"  who  were  doubtless  popular.  A 
copious  draught  of  wine,  followed  by  a  bath,  was 
a  favourite  prescription  of  this  school. 
The  law,  the  army,  education,  literature,  more 
_y  rarely  farming  and  medicine,  were  the  chief 
\  occupations  which  Roman  society  regarded  as 
\^worthy  of  a  gentleman.  Descending  a  step  lower 
in  the  social  scale,  we  come  to  trades  of  various 
kinds,  one  of  the  most   lucrative   of  which  was 


VARIOUS  TRADES.  145 

that  of  the  prceco  or  crier  and  auctioneer,  a  fact 
which  seems  to  indicate  that  property  changed 
hands  very  rapidly  at  Rome.  Another  prominent 
trade  was  that  of  the  fullers,  who  whitened  and 
mended  dirty  and  torn  togas.  The  purple  trade 
is  also  characteristic.  The  barbers'  shops  were 
much  frequented  for  the  sake  of  gossip ;  and 
barbers  often  made  large  fortunes.  Juvenal 
speaks  of  a  tonsor  owning  an  innumerable  number 
of  villas,  and  Martial  of  another  whom  his  mis- 
tress had  raised  to  the  rank  of  eques  by  a  large 
present  of  money.  Architects,  sculptors,  and 
painters  generally  belonged  to  the  tradesman 
class.  So  did  the  important  maritime  merchants, 
who  carried  on  the  foreign  trade  of  Italy,  and 
conveyed  luxuries  to  Rome  from  every  quarter  of 
the  known  world. 

Trades-guilds,  not  unlike  those  of  the  middle 
ages,  existed  at  Rome  from  the  very  earliest 
period,  their  origin  being  ascribed  to  Numa. 
They  were  nine  in  number  originally,  but  others 
were  added  later.  They  each  had  a  meeting- 
house of  their  own,  and  rules  of  their  society, 
and  religious  ceremonies  which  were  performed 
at  public  gatherings  of  the  guild. 

K 


146  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

Another  important  trade  was  that  of  the 
caupones,  or  inn-keepers,  who  seem  to  have  been 
generally  Orientals,  often  Syrians.  The  keeper  of 
a  popina  was  despised,  and  his  trade  regarded  as 
disreputable,  not  only  on  account  of  the  dishonesty 
of  which  he  was  accused,  but  because  the  inns  and 
eating-houses  were  often  used  for  debauchery  and 
vicious  purposes.  Drunkenness  seems  to  have 
been  common  at  some  of  these  low  haunts, 
which  were  frequented  not  merely  by  slaves  and 
vagabonds,  but  by  dissipated  members  of  the 
upper  classes. 

The  last  trade  we  shall  mention  here  is  that  of 
bookselling.  This  was  a  very  flourishing  business, 
as  large  libraries  were  frequent  at  Rome,  both  pub- 
he  ones — of  which  there  were  at  last  no  less  than 
twenty-eight — and  private  collections,  several  of 
which  contained  upwards  of  twenty  or  thirty 
thousand  volumes.  The  multiplication  of  copies 
was  effected  entirely  by  slaves,  who  copied  so  fast 
and  cheaply  that  the  cost  of  books  was  even  less 
than  at  the  present  day.* 

*  Sir  Q.  Lewis  (Credibility  of  Roman  History,  1. 197)  says,  "It 
may  be  doubted  whether  there  were  ever  a  hundred  copies  of 
Virgil  or  Horace  in  existence  at  any  time  before  the  invention  of 
printing."    I  believe  this  statement  to  be  entirely  erroneous. 


RECIPIENTS  OF  CHARITY.  147 

The  unfortunate  contempt  for  trade,  which  had 
been  bred  at  Rome  by  warlike  habits,  had  survived 
the  state  of  things  which  produced  it.  The  Roman 
citizen  was  still  debarred  by  an  unreasonable  pride 
from  those  humble  pursuits  which  in  healthy  com- 
munities give  occupation  to  and  provide  a  main- 
tenance for  the  majority  of  the  population.  There 
was  in  consequence  a  large  number  of  persons 
who  had  no  regular  means  of  livelihood,  and  who 
were  obliged  to  depend  on  others  for  their  support. 
The  poorest  class,  very  numerous  in  the  capital, 
was  provided  with  a  daily  dole  of  bread  by  the 
state.  That  above  them,  comprising  a  large  part 
of  the  third  order  or  middle  class,  was  to  a  great 
extent  dependent  on  that  peculiar  Roman  institu- 
tion, the  clientela.  Like  almost  everything  else, 
it  was  not  an  invention  of  the  empire,  but  a 
modification  of  an  old  custom.  Under  the  re- 
public the  clients  rendered  real  services  to  their 
patrons,  and  the  relations  between  them  were  not 
unlike  those  between  lord  and  vassal  in  the 
healthier  time  of  feudalism.  In  such  relations 
there  was  no  loss  of  dignity  on  either  side.    The 

Among  other  evidence  for  the  abundance  of  books,  we  may  notice 
that  Augustus  confiscated  2,000  copies  of  the  pseudo-Sibylline 
books  in  Rome  alone. 

K  2 


148  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

patron  gave  his  client  his  powerful  protection  and 
assistance  in  case  of  need,  and  the  client  repaid 
the  obligation  by  faithful  and  honourable  service 
to  the  patron.  Under  the  empire  this  institution 
had  ceased  to  have  any  real  value.  The  patron 
no  longer  needed  the  adherence  of  his  client 
except  for  purposes  of  ostentation,  and  the  client 
stood  in  small  need  of  protection  from  his  patron, 
except  in  the  form  of  pecuniary  assistance.  Hence 
the  relations  between  patron  and  client  became 
degraded  on  both  sides.  On  the  one  side  pride 
and  insolence,  on  the  other  servility  and  avarice, 
became  the  characteristics  of  the  two  parties. 
The  duties  of  the  client  were,  in  the  first  place,  to 
call  upon  his  patron  early  in  the  morning,  a 
sufficiently  troublesome  obligation  considering  the 
unpleasant  and  even  dangerous  condition  of  the 
streets,  and  the  necessity  of  wearing  the  uncom- 
fortable toga.  Then  he  had  to  hold  himself  con- 
stantly in  readiness  to  accompany  his  patron  on  a 
walk  or  journey,  and  to  perform  any  little  services 
that  he  might  require.  Lastly,  he  had  to  observe 
a  strict  and  even  humiliating  deference,  never 
omitting  to  address  his  patron  by  the  word 
"  Domine,"  and  paying  him  every  kind  of  flattery 


THE  "  SPORTULA."  149 

and  attention.  As  a  recompense  for  these  irksome 
duties,  the  client  received  a  small  payment  in 
money,  called  sportula,  the  origin  of  which  is  a 
matter  of  dispute,  but  it  was  probably  at  first  an 
allowance  of  food  instead  of  a  meal  at  the  patron's 
house.  The  client  might  also  expect  occasional 
invitations  to  dine  with  his  patron — a  doubtful 
boon,  since  it  was  not  uncommon  for  the  host  to 
remind  his  guest  of  his  inferior  position  by 
humiliating  treatment,  providing  him  with  inferior 
food  and  wine,  and  allowing  his  domestics  to 
neglect  and  insult  him.  This  behaviour  was 
doubtless  confined  to  the  vulgar  nouveaux  riches, 
but  we  can  hardly  be  surprised  at  small  con- 
sideration being  shewn  to  a  class  of  men  who 
willingly  placed  themselves  in  so  servile  a  position. 
It  appears  that  towards  the  end  of  the  century 
patrons  had  begun  to  feel  the  remuneration  of 
their  clients  a  burden,  and  to  stint  their  sportula. 
Domitian  even  abolished  the  money  payment  for 
a  time,  and  complaints  are  made  that  the  good  days 
for  clients  are  over.  The  increased  number  of 
these  dependants  doubtless  made  the  maintenance 
of  the  system  difficult.  The  sportula  was  now 
demanded  not  only  by  poor  and  humble  hangers- 


150  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

on  of  the  great  houses,  but  by  persons  of  good 
position,  so  that  Juvenal  can  even  represent  a 
consul  adding  up  at  the  end  of  the  year  the 
income  derived  from  his  patron's  presents.  The 
satirist  speaks  with  great  truth  and  force  of  the 
demoralising  effect  of  this  universal  parasitism. 
A  man  who  is  not  ashamed  to  submit  to  the 
indignities  which  a  client  has  to  bear,  does  not 
deserve,  he  says,  to  be  believed  on  oath  in  a  court 
of  justice.  His  patron  is  right  to  insult  him:  if  a 
man  will  put  up  with  anything  he  ought  to  be 
made  to  do  so ;  it  is  only  a  step  further  for  the 
parasite  to  submit  to  a  flogging  like  a  slave. 
Better  far  to  beg  for  bread  on  the  mendicant's 
station  than  to  be  dependent  on  the  liberality  of 
some  wealthy  parvenu.  Such,  however,  was  not 
the  opinion  of  very  many  people  at  Rome  who 
thought  it  the  highest  boon  of  fortune  to  live  at 
another's  expense,  and  though  ashamed  to  work, 
did  not  blush  to  live  on  charity. 

The  class  below  the  majority  of  the  clients  was 
partly  supported  by  humble  occupations,  partly 
dependent  on  the  state-distribution  of  corn.  This 
pernicious  institution  did  more  than  anything  else 
to  undermine  the  health  of  the  Roman  community. 


BEGGARS  151 

So  far  as  we  can  learn,  a  very  large  number  of 
persons  resided  in  \he  capital  simply  in  order  to 
eat  the  bread  of  idleness,  practising  no  trade,  and 
addicted  to  all  the  vices  which  want  of  work  never 
fails  to  encourage.  These  were  the  mob  who 
frequented  the  public  games  and  public  baths, 
spending  their  whole  day  in  a  round  of  demo- 
ralising amusement,  and  preying  upon  the  treasury, 
which  in  its  turn  could  only  supply  the  demand  by 
exactions  from  the  impoverished  provinces. 

We  have  now  reached  the  lowest  rung  of  the 
ladder,  the  class  of  beggars  by  profession.  These 
were  very  numerous,  a  fact  which  perhaps  testifies, 
as  Mr.  Lecky  believes,  to  the  generosity  of  the  city 
in  relieving  distress.  It  appears,  however,  that  in 
spite  of  the  corn-distribution,  a  good  deal  of  abject 
poverty  existed  at  Rome,  so  that  the  beggars  may 
have  adopted  their  trade  from  necessity  and  not 
from  choice.  Some  failed  to  secure  their  share  of 
the  dole,  and  food  and  everything  else  was  dear  at 
Rome.  We  are  not  surprised  to  hear  of  numbers 
of  mendicants  waiting  about  the  bridges,  the  Servian 
Agger,  and  other  places  of  public  resort,  making 
themselves  regular  stations  there,  sleeping  on  mats 
in  the  place  where,  in  the  day-time,  they  asked 


152  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

for  alms.  Martial  advises  a  destitute  man  to  be- 
come a  beggar  rather  than  starve  in  honest  indi- 
gence; so,  perhaps,  some  Roman  mendicants  ob- 
tained something  more  than  bare  subsistence. 

Besides  the  broad  division  of  the  community 
into  three  orders,  and  the  subdivisions  of  the  third 
order  according  to  the  nature  of  their  professions 
or  trades,  social  inequalities  were  largely  fostered 
by  prejudices  about  race.  Not  only  was  the  citizen 
preferred  to  the  non-citizen,  the  Italian  to  the 
foreigner,  but  even  the  natives  of  other  towns  in 
Italy  were  judged  inferior  to  those  who  came  of 
Roman  parentage.  Augustus  was  reproached  by 
Marcus  Antonius  because  his  mother  was  a  native 
of  Aricia.  Livia  Augusta  was  considered  not  to 
be  of  unblemished  descent,  because  her  mater- 
nal grandfather  was  a  town  councillor  of  Fundi. 
Livia  the  younger,  the  wife  of  Drusus,  son  of 
Tiberius,  was  seduced  by  Sejanus,  upon  which 
Tacitus  remarks,  "  So  this  woman,  who  was  the 
daughter-in-law  of  Tiberius  and  the  niece  of 
Augustus,  disgraced  herself,  her  ancestors,  and  her 
posterity  by  adultery  with  a  municipal"  Fried- 
lander  justly  quotes  this  as  one  of  the  strongest 
expressions  of  narrow  Roman  prejudice.    And  if 


RACE-PREJUDICE.  153 

even  the  towns  of  Italy  were  despised  by  the 
haughty  natives  of  the  capital,  how  much  greater 
was  their  scorn  of  provincials  and  foreigners !  We 
have  already  mentioned  the  disgust  caused  by  the 
Gaulish  senators  introduced  by  Julius  Caesar. 
Cicero  declares  that  the  most  distinguished  Gaul 
is  not  to  be  compared  with  the  meanest  Roman 
citizen.  Even  the  polished  Greek  was  regarded 
with  hardly  less  disdain,  a  feeling  in  his  case  often 
mingled  with  hatred  at  the  superior  adroitness 
which  enabled  him  to  outstrip  the  slower  or  more 
honest  Roman.  Umbricius*  leaves  Rome  in  disgust 
and  betakes  himself  to  quiet  Cumae,  because  he 
cannot  bear  to  see  Greeks  put  before  him.  "  Shall 
that  man,"  he  asks,  "  take  precedence  of  me,  who 
came  to  Rome  with  a  cargo  of  plums  and  figs  ? 
Is  it  of  no  account  that  my  infancy  drew  the  breath 
of  the  Aventine,  and  was  nurtured  on  the  Sabine 
olive-berry  ?  "  How  strange  is  the  state  of  feeling 
displayed  by  the  invectives  of  the  Augustan  poets 
against  Antonius  and  Cleopatra !  "  Nefas,  iEgyptia 
conjux,"  "  Dedecus  iEgypti,"  "  Fatale  monstrum," 
"mulier  ausa  Jovi  nostro  latrantem  opponere 
Anubim."    Such  are  a  few  of  the  expressions  ap- 

*  Juv.  Sat.  8. 


154  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

plied  to  the  Greek  Queen  of  Egypt,  the  descendant 
of  a  long  and  glorious  line.  One  might  fancy 
Cleopatra  was  a  savage  ^Ethiopian  woman,  who 
had  fascinated  the  representative  of  a  princely 
house.  The  fall  of  the  Julian  dynasty  did  some- 
thing to  modify  this  intense  national  pride.  First 
Italians, then  provincials,  gained  the  imperial  purple: 
the  sovereignty  of  the  Roman  stock  was  already 
at  an  end,  and  the  counterfeit  which  still  survived 
was  less  powerful  and  less  exclusive.  The  empire 
was  gradually  fusing  all  the  different  nationalities, 
and  breaking  down  the  social  distinctions  which 
the  pride  of  a  conquering  race  had  so  carefully 
erected.  The  process  was,  however,  very  gradual, 
for  the  "  new  men  "  were  almost  as  tenacious  of 
their  privileges  and  superiority  as  the  old  families, 
and  even  the  brilliant  development  of  genius  in 
Spain  during  our  period,  and  the  splendour,  rival- 
ling Rome,  of  Antioch  and  Alexandria,  failed  to 
compel  the  capital  to  recognise  the  provinces  as 
her  equals. 

There  was,  however,  one  exception  to  this  rigid 
exclusiveness,  and  that  in  a  quarter  where  it  might 
have  been  least  expected.  The  nobility  of  Rome 
refused  to   treat  the    distinguished    Spaniard    or 


PROVINCIALS  AND  FREEDMEN.  155 

Greek  on  a  footing  of  equality,  but  they  were  often 
ready  to  court  the  wealthy  freedman.  Nothing  in 
Roman  history  is  more  remarkable  than  the  ease 
with  which  a  manumitted  slave  passed  into  the 
privileged  order,  and  obtained  for  his  children  and 
grandchildren,  if  not  for  himself,  the  same  rights  as 
genuine  Romans,  compared  with  the  difficulties 
and  restrictions  thrown  in  the  way  of  the  free  pro- 
vincial who  desired  the  same  advantages.  It  may 
even  be  stated  that  a  slave  in  a  wealthy  house  at 
Rome  had  a  better  career  open  for  his  ambition 
than  the  ablest  citizen  of  Antioch  or  Gades.  Even 
in  the  matter  of  marriage,  where  aristocratic 
exclusiveness  is  generally  strongest,  the  same 
curious  phenomenon  is  displayed.  The  union  of 
Antonius  with  the  daughter  of  the  Ptolemies  was 
deemed  a  hideous  disgrace  :  but  Augustus  found  it 
necessary  to  make  a  law  forbidding  ladies  of  sena- 
torial family  to  contract  marriages  with  freedmen, 
and  his  successors  at  least  often  granted  exemp-4 
tions  from  it  on  the  supplication  of  friends.  The 
wife  of  Claudius  Etruscus,  a  native  of  Smyrna,  and 
slave  of  Tiberius,  whose  fortune  it  had  been 

"  Semper  Csesareum  coluisse  latns," 

was  the  sister  of  a  consul.*    Antonius  Felix,  who, 

*  Stat.  Silv.  3.  3. 


156  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

in  the  words  of  Tacitus, "  exercised  the  power  of  a 
king  in  the  spirit  of  a  slave,"  married  Drusilla,  the 
granddaughter  of  Antonius  the  triumvir.  Such 
instances  seem  to  have  been  common.  In  society- 
such  freedmen  were  not  excluded  from  good 
circles,  though  their  arrogance  and  bad  manners 
often  made  them  objects  of  hatred  and  disgust. 
The  enormous  wealth  which  they  often  possessed,  of 
which  we  gave  instances  earlier  in  the  chapter, 
was  a  sure  passport  to  social  success  at  Rome, 
where  "  everything  had  its  price."  A  Zoilus,  if 
he  happened  to  be  childless,  was  certain  of  plenty 
of  deference  and  attention,  even  from  the  best 
families.  His  vices  and  vulgarities  were  more  than 
compensated  by  his  palaces  and  villas. 

The  vast  majority  of  freedmen  were,  however, 
in  a  much  more  humble  station.  We  find  them  in 
fact  in  every  rank  of  life ;  in  the  learned  professions, 
in  trade,  in  commerce,  in  domestic  offices,  and  in 
the  lowest  grades  of  poverty.  From  their  numbers 
and  position  they  gradually  gave  their  type  to  the 
Roman  community,  which  assumed  more  and  more 
that  de-nationalized  and  cosmopolitan  character 
■  which  ended  in  final  disintegration. 

We  have  yet  to  speak  more  in  particular  of  some 


THE  JEWS  AND  THEIR  INFLUENCE.      157 

of  the  foreign  elements  which  had  entered  into 
Roman  society,  and  we  shall  begin  with  the  Jews, 
who,  from  their  numbers  and  marked  individuality, 
were  a  prominent  feature  in  Roman  society.  So 
large  was  the  number  of  Jews  and  Syrians  in  Rome 
that  Juvenal  complains  that  the  Orontes  has  flowed 
into  the  Tiber.  Josephus  mentions  8,000  Jews 
established  in  the  capital  in  his  time.  Seneca,  in  a 
fragment  quoted  by  Augustine,  declares  that  "  the 
customs  of  that  cursed  race  have  prevailed  so  far 
that  they  are  accepted  over  the  whole  world  :  the 
vanquished  have  given  laws  to  their  conquerors." 
Tiberius  expelled  4,000  persons  from  Rome,  and 
banished  them  to  Sardinia,  as  infected  with  Jewish 
and  Egyptian  superstitions.  Despised  and  hated 
as  they  were,  they  made  many  proselytes.  From 
the  establishment  of  the  empire  they  began  to 
push  themselves  into  every  class  of  society,  and  to 
exercise  a  powerful  influence  in  the  state.  Caius 
probably  learned  his  ideas  of  absolute  monarchy 
from  Herod  :  Titus  was  captivated  by  Berenice; 
and  the  number  of  converts  to  the  Jewish  faith 
cannot  be  counted.  The  Sabbath  was  a  joke  in 
Horace's  time  :  in  Juvenal's  it  was  to  many  a 
reality.    Outbreaks  of  persecution  were  sometimes 


158  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

sanctioned  by  the  emperor  :  e.g.  Tiberius  expelled 
4,000,  as  above-mentioned,  and  Domitian  attacked 
the  Jewish  religion  with  a  ferocity  as  great  as  that 
afterwards  directed  against  the  Christians.  It  is 
possible,  as  Merivale  thinks,  that  the  insurrection 
under  Vespasian,  and  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem 
by  Titus,  gave  a  death-blow  to  Jewish  influence  at 
Rome,  but  if  so,  it  was  not  long  before  the  progress 
of  Christianity  again  made  Jewish  ideas  an  impor- 
tant factor  in  society. 

Of  other  Oriental  nations  we  may  mention  the 
Egyptians,  who  were  celebrated  for  their  skill  in 
surgery,  as  well  as  for  their  licentious  character, 
and  the  Syrians,  who  were  much  devoted  to  the 
study  of  astrology  and  kindred  sciences.  As  for 
the  Greeks,  they  pervaded  the  whole  city  and 
every  class  of  society,  so  that  Rome,  in  the  words 
of  the  satirist,  had  become  "  a  Greek  city."  The 
versatile  Greek  could  turn  his  hand  to  every  trade, 
from  rhetoric  to  fortune-telling,  and  seldom 
allowed  scruples  to  stand  in  the  way  of  profit. 
It  is  not  necessary  here  to  enter  further  into 
the  wide  subject  of  Greek  influence  at  Rome. 
The  northern  and  western  nations  were  very 
slightly  represented  among  the   free  population, 


TEE  SLA  VE  POP  ULA  TION.  159 

and  their  presence  does  not  call  for  any  special 
remark. 

It  still  remains  to  speak  of  slavery,  that  most 
important  of  Roman  institutions,  and  of  the  mass 
of  human  beings,  probably  exceeding  in  numbers 
all  the  rest  of  the  population,  whdse  legal  position 
was  simply  that  of  chattels  of  the  Roman  people. 
In  the  chapter  on  morality  we  have  already  dealt 
with  some  aspects  of  the  question,  tracing  the 
improvement  in  the  condition  of  the  slave  which 
took  place,  in  our  period,  and  the  movement  of 
public  opinion  with  regard  to  humanity  towards 
slaves.  Here  we  must  consider  the  slaves  as  one 
class  in  the  community,  and  endeavour  to  present 
a  complete  though  only  outlined  sketch  of  their 
life  in  that  capacity. 

Slaves  were  divided  into  two  classes,  the  familia 
urbana  and  the  familia  rustica.  The  former 
consisted  of  domestic  slaves,  who  performed  all 
the  duties  of  the  household,  the  latter  of  the 
field-labourers  on  their  master's  country  estates. 
Let  us  take  first  the  domestic  slaves,  who  were 
generally  better  treated  and  in  a  better  position 
than  the  country  slaves.  The  simple  old  custom 
by  which  a  few  slaves  only  were  attached  to  the 


160  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME, 

house,  and  ate  at  the  same  table  with  their  master, 
had  given  place  to  immense  crowds  of  domestic 
slaves,  and  a  corresponding  sub-division  of  labour. 
Wealthy  Romans  seem  actually  to  have  exercised 
their  ingenuity  in  finding  work  for  the  largest 
possible  number  of  slaves.  It  would  be  tedious  to 
enumerate  even  a  quarter  of  the  offices  which  are 
mentioned  in  various  Latin  writers ;  among  the 
most  curious  are  the  folder  of  clothes  (vestiplicus), 
the  custodian  of  the  Corinthian  vases  (a  Corinthiis), 
and  the  sandal-boy  (calceator),  whose  duty  it  was 
to  put  on  his  master's  shoes.  The  management  of 
this  unwieldy  and,  perhaps,  idle  household,  was 
committed  to  a  head-slave,  who  held  the  post  of 
atriensis.  He  was  responsible  for  the  good 
behaviour  and  industry  of  his  subordinates,  and 
allotted  them  their  tasks.  A  large  number  were 
generally  employed  about  the  atrium,  a  large 
number  in  the  kitchen,  and  a  third  detachment 
had  its  duties  out  of  doors,  to  run  errands,  or 
attend  their  master  abroad.  Among  these  last  we 
may  notice  as  characteristic  of  Roman  society  the 
nomenclator,  whose  business  it  was  to  warn  his 
master  of  the  approach  of  any  acquaintance  and 
whisper  to  him  the  name,  which  he  might  other- 


MUL  TIPLICA  TION  OF  SLA  VES.  161 

wise  have  forgotten.  Litter-carriers  and  simple 
attendants  (pedisequi)  were  also  in  this  class.  In 
the  house  were  the  educated  slaves,  secretaries, 
librarians,  readers,  &c,  and  also  the  pages  who 
waited  at  dinner,  the  dwarf,  and  the  performers  of 
various  menial  offices.  We  can  find  no  parallel  to 
the  extraordinary  multiplication  of  domestic  slaves 
in  the  house  of  the  rich  Roman,  unless  it  be  in  the 
effeminate  luxury  of  an  Oriental  court.  Parve- 
nues  were  of  course  the  worst  offenders,  men  of 
the  type  of  Zoilus,  whose  habits  Martial  describes 
in  disgusting  detail.*  A  gentleman  and  a  man  of 
self-respect  would  doubtless  dispense  with  many 
of  these  ministers  of  self-indulgence  and  idleness. 
The  familia  rustica  consisted  of  all  the  "hands" 
necessary  to  work  the  land  and  farm,  ploughmen, 
keepers  of  horses  oxen  sheep  mules  pigs  and 
asses,  diggers,  sowers,  reapers,  vine-dressers, 
gardeners,  bee-keepers,  gamekeepers,  &c,  &c, 
the  whole  number  being  usually  under  the  super- 
intendence of  a  villicus  or  bailiff,  who  appointed 
them  their  tasks,  and  distributed  their  rations. 
This  class  of  slaves  generally  had  a  harder  lot  than 
the   domestic    slaves.     They   often   worked   in. 

*  Mart.  3.  82. 
L 


162  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

chains,  to  prevent  them  from  escaping,  and  at 
night  they  were  frequently  huddled  together  in  an 
ergastulum,  or  barrack,  half  underground,  which 
must  have  caused  great  misery.  It  seems,  from 
Pliny  and  other  writers,  that  in  his  time  a  more 
merciful  system  was  coming  in. 

How  then  was  this  immense  demand  for  human 
beings  supplied  ?  In  the  first  place,  by  the  natural 
birth  of  children  in  the  slave-class.  The  maxim  of 
the  modern  slave-dealer  that  it  is  cheaper  to  buy 
than  to  breed,  was  not  part  of  the  Roman  system 
of  economy.  All  writers  on  the  subject  recom- 
mend that  slaves  should  be  encouraged  to  have 
children,  though  they  speak  as  if  some  owners 
acted  on  a  different  principle.  Columella  even 
recommends  a  "jus  triumliberorum"  to  be  granted 
to  "ancillae,"  three  sons  conferring  a  claim  to 
"  vacatio  "  or  immunity  from  hand-labour,  and  a 
greater  number  being  rewarded  by  manumission.* 
In  general  the  "vernae,  ditis  examen  domus"  were 
undoubtedly  regarded  as  a  source  of  revenue. 
They  were  not,  however,  the  best  servants,  as  they 
were  often  forward  and  impertinent,  and  cunning 
in  evading  their  work.    We  have  no  means  of 

*  CoL  1.  8. 19. 


SLA  VE-DEA  LING.  163 

judging  what  proportion  the  vernce  bore  to  the 
whole  body  of  slaves,  but  in  all  probability  the 
birth-rate  in  the  slave-class  was  low,  and  in- 
fant mortality  very  prevalent.  Another  source  of 
supply  was  opened  by  successful  wars.  It  is  pro- 
bable that  at  one  period  of  Roman  history  this 
was  the  most  fruitful  recruiting  ground  of  the  slave 
population.  Whole  nations  were  sold  after  a 
victory,  sub  hasta  or  sub  corona,  according  to 
Roman  phrase,  this  being  the  recognised  treatment 
of  prisoners  taken  in  war.  But  the  empire  was 
less  fertile  in  conquest,  and  other  means  had  to  be 
resorted  to.  It  appears  that  kidnapping  was 
carried  on  to  a  frightful  extent.  We  even  hear  of 
eastern  provinces  complaining  that  they  can  no 
longer  furnish  their  contingent  of  troops,  thej 
population  having  been  drained  off  by  the  slave- 
dealers.  A  fearful  picture  is  here  opened  before 
us,  and  we  regret  that  so  little  information  is  to  be 
obtained  as  to  the  extent  of  this  iniquity  and  the 
means  by  which  it  was  carried  on.  We  gather 
that  in  out-of-the-way  places,  where  the  hand  of 
the  law  could  not  make  itself  felt,  men  were  stolen 
and  carried  off  and  sold  as  slaves,  or  shut  up  in 
ergastula  without  a  shadow  of  right.      We  are 

L  2 


164  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

astonished  to  find  that  this  was  the  case  even  in 
Italy,  where  Seneca  declares  that  ergastula 
ingenuorum  existed,  in  which  travellers  and  other 
defenceless  persons  were  immured.  In  Cicero's 
speech  pro  Cluentio,  a  work  in  which  nearly  all 
the  blackest  features  of  Roman  life  are  collected, 
we  have  an  instance  of  a  free  man  being  kidnapped 
and  sold  into  slavery  through  the  treachery  of  his 
relations,  who  wished  to  get  him  out  of  the  way. 
This  crime  was  probably  not  uncommon  in  an 
age  which  invented  the  science  of  legacy-hunting ; 
and  even  without  collusion  on  the  part  of  the 
relations  it  must  have  been  extremely  difficult  for 
the  victim  to  escape  or  make  the  place  of  his 
detention  known  to  his  friends.  And  if  even 
Italians  were  subject  to  this  fate,  what  must  have 
been  the  case  with  the  unhappy  provincials,  for 
whom  no  one  cared,  when  the  greedy  and  unscru- 
pulous mangones  were  ever  on  the  watch  to  seize 
some  handsome  boy  or  maiden  for  the  Roman 
market  ?  If  force  was  not  possible,  what  could  be 
easier  than  to  make  a  bargain  with  the  tax-col- 
lector to  distrain  upon  a  poor  family,  and  in 
default  of  payment  hand  them  over  to  the  dealers  ? 
When  we  hear  of  the  vast  slave-marts  at  Delos 


KIDNAPPING.  165 


and  other  places,  we  cannot  account  for  the  num- 
bers daily  sold  there,  except  on  the  supposition 
that  immense  numbers  of  free  persons  were  ille- 
gally kidnapped  and  enslaved  throughout  the 
Empire.  The  existence  of  the  Lex  Fabia  de 
plagiariis  testifies  to  the  prevalence  of  the  crime  ; 
but  it  is  to  be  feared  that  where  the  pecuniary 
interests  of  the  wealthy  mango  and  the  powerful 
purchaser  were  set  against  the  claims  of  one  who 
was  at  least  de  facto  a  slave,  the  chances  of 
redress  must  have  been  slight  indeed.  The  slaves 
who  passed  through  the  hands  of  the  dealers  were 
not  all  kidnapped.  We  hear  of  parents  selling 
their  children  into  slavery,  and  of  poor  persons 
voluntarily  selling  themselves.  From  what  we 
said  above  on  the  subject  of  freedmen  it  may  be 
imagined  that  in  some  cases  an  oppressed  pro- 
vincial might  gain  by  entering  the  service  of  a 
Roman  noble.  Legal  degradation  to  slavery  was 
ordained  in  certain  cases,  the  commonest  probably 
being  that  of  provincials  who  could  not  meet  the 
demands  of  the  tax-collector.  Great  cruelty  and 
injustice  probably  resulted  from  this  harsh  usage. 

The  traffic  in  slaves  was  of  course  an  important 
feature  in  Roman  commerce.    When  a  slave  was 


166  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

to  be  sold,  he  was  usually  exposed  on  a  platform 
(catasta),  with  chalked  feet,*  and  a  label  round 
his  neck  setting  forth  his  character,  &c,  and  any 
faults  he  might  have.  If  the  vendor  could  give  no 
warrant  for  him,  a  cap  was  placed  on  his  head. 
The  purchaser  might  bring  an  action  for  conceal- 
ment of  personal  or  moral  defects.  Sometimes, 
however,  valuable  slaves  were  sold  privately,  or  in 
the  back-rooms  of  shops,  to  avoid  the  curiosity  of 
the  vulgar,  who  could  not  purchase  them.  The 
prices  of  slaves  of  course  varied  widely.  As  luxury 
increased,  the  relative  value  of  different  sorts  of 
slaves  altered.  A  cook,  who  had  formerly  been 
the  cheapest,  was  now  (in  our  period)  one  of  the 
dearest,  of  slaves.  Ordinary  field  labourers  were 
cheap — from  £$  to  .£10  seems  to  have  been  an 
ordinary  price  for  such.  Skilled  labour,  of  course, 
commanded  a  higher  price,  and  servi  literati  some- 
times fetched  100,000  sesterces,  or  even  more. 
Instruments  of  vice  and  luxury  were  bought  at 
extraordinary  prices.  We  hear  of  100,000,  and 
even  200,000  sesterces  being  given  for  a  puer 
delicatus,  and  100,000  for  a  girl.    Eunuchs  fetched 

*  This  was  a  sign  that  the  slave  had  been  brought  from  beyond 
seas. 


PRICES  OF  SLAVES.  167 

immense  sums,  up  to  500,000,  and  dwarfs,  buffoons, 
and  abortions  of  nature  or  art  were  much  sought 
after.  A  trusted  steward,  atriensis,  or  villicust 
would  also  command  a  high  price.  Of  the  nation- 
alities, Greeks  were  naturally  the  most  expensive, 
Sardinians  and  (probably)  Syrians  among  the 
cheapest. 

Great  attention  was  given  to  the  education  of 
slaves  for  the  place  they  were  to  occupy  in  the 
household.  Those  who  were  to  exercise  any 
handicraft  were  put  to  a  careful  apprenticeship  ; 
those  who  were  to  amuse  their  master  by  jests  and 
saucy  repartees  were  given  lessons  in  this  art ; 
sometimes  little  verttce,]ust  emerging  from  infancy, 
were  petted  like  dogs  or  kittens,  wearing  no  clothes 
except  coloured  ribbons  and  gold  and  silver  orna- 
ments ;  those  who  promised  to  be  idiots  were 
trained  to  improve  their  faculty  for  the  amusement 
of  their  master,  while  those  who  shewed  literary 
taste  were  trained  as  readers  or  secretaries ;  classes 
generally  consisting  of  ten  were  formed  to  facilitate 
the  teaching  of  a  large  number,  and  houses  called 
pcedagogia  were  kept  for  those  who  were  to  serve 
as  pages  and  cupbearers. 

The  treatment  of  slaves  of  course  varied  with 


168  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

the  character  of  the  master.  There  are  several 
indications  that  their  position  was  not  altogether 
so  intolerable  as  some  modern  writers  would  have 
ns  believe.  The  good  old  custom  by  which  the 
familia  dined  at  the  same  table  with  their  master 
had,  it  is  true,  ceased,  as  much  from  necessity  as 
from  growing  pride ;  for  the  numbers  were  now 
far  too  great  for  it  to  be  maintained.  We  hear,  how- 
ever, that  good  masters  always  invited  their  slaves 
to  their  triclinium  during  the  Saturnalia,  and  on 
feast  days,  and  the  system  of  rations  had  this 
advantage  for  the  slave,  that  he  was  able  by  self- 
denial  to  save  out  of  the  allowance  made  to  him, 
and  thus  accumulate  a  sum  with  which  he  could 
eventually  hope  to  buy  his  freedom.  The  fact 
that  this  was  possible  shews  that  the  slaves  were 
not  seriously  stinted  in  the  matter  of  food.  The 
peculium  was  indeed  now  universally  recognised, 
even  in  the  familia  rustica,  and  it  was  considered 
a  mark  of  recklessness  and  folly  in  a  slave  not  to 
have  saved  anything.  Another  pleasing  feature 
is  the  care  taken  not  to  divide  families.*  In 
this  respect  Roman  slavery  compares  favourably 

*  This  subject  has  been  spoken  of  already  under  the  head  of 
"  Morality."    The  repetition  seemed  unavoidable 


TEE  A  TMENT  OF  SLA  VES.  1C9 

with  that  of  America  in  the  present  century, 
according  to  the  best  known  accounts.  The  Digest 
rules  that  a  legacy  of  a  slave  is  to  be  taken  to  in- 
clude his  wife  and  children,  "  for  it  is  not  to  be 
believed  that  he  (the  testator)  meant  to  enjoin 
a  cruel  separation."  Perhaps,  however,  we  have  no 
right  to  quote  the  Digest  as  evidence  for  the  first 
century ;  and  it  may  be  reasonably  doubted  whether 
the  obligation  was  recognised  under  the  Twelve 
Caesars.  Some  care  seems,  however,  to  have  been 
taken  about  the  marriage  of  slaves,  if  the  term 
may  be  used  where  the  law  only  recognized 
contubernium.  Varro  recommends  that  the  slave 
and  his  wife  shall  be  chosen  to  suit  each  other, 
though  only  apparently  to  make  them  work  more 
contentedly. 

The  punishments  of  slaves  will  be  dealt  with  in 
another  place,*  where  we  shall  try  to  shew  that 
a  real  though  tardy  improvement  in  humanity  is 
perceptible  through  the  period.  We  wish  we  could 
say  the  same  of  another  subject,  the  most  painful 
part  of  servile  degradation.  When  Seneca  says 
"  Impudicitia  in  ingenuo  crimen,  in  servo  neces- 

*  We  have,  however,  omitted  the  details  of  punishment  and 
torture,  which  are  not  pleasant  reading.  Evidence  is  collected  by 
Wallon,  Becker,  Marquardt,  and  others. 


170  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

sitas,  in  liberto  officium,"  we  recognize  how  deep 
was  the  infamy  to  which  slaves  were  often 
compelled  to  submit.*  It  is  true  that  a  magis- 
trate already  existed  in  Seneca's  time  whose  duty 
it  was  to  protect  slaves  from  "  saevitia  et  libido, " 
but  we  fear  the  wrongs  of  the  victims  seldom 
reached  his  ears. 

The  most  envied  members  of  the  servile  class 
were  naturally  the  official  slaves  of  Caesar's  house- 
hold, and  those  who  held  similar  positions  in 
the  public  offices.  A  dispensator  of  ^this  class  was 
quite  a  great  man.  An  epitaph  of  a  slave  who 
held  the  office  of  dispensator  of  the  imperial  trea- 
sury in  Gallia  Lugdunensis,  under  Tiberius,  has  been 
found  on  the  Appian-road.  It  mentions  sixteen 
vicarii  or  slaves  of  his  own  who  formed  his  escort 
at  the  time  of  his  death.  These  gradations  in  rank 
were  doubtless  a  great  security  to  the  masters,  who 
could  trust  their  upper  slaves  to  keep  the  rest  in 
order. 

The  feeling  with  which  slaves  were  regarded  was 
still  very  unsatisfactory.  Stoic  philosophers  and 
men  of  refinement  and  humanity  did  their  best  to 

*  Lecky  and  Merivale  both  take  too  favourable  a  view  of  Roman 
morality  on  this  head,  but  it  is  not  necessary  to  say  more  about  it 
here. 


FEELING  A  BO  UT  SLA  VES.  171 

inculcate  the  natural  equality  of  man ;  but  a  more 
faithful  indication  of  the  popular  opinion  is  given 
by  such  cool  classifications  as  that  of  Varro  in  the 
preceding  generation.  "Agricultural  implements 
are  divided  into  three  classes — vocal,  as  slaves, 
semi-vocal,  as  oxen,  and  dumb,  as  carts."  The 
"  custom  of  our  ancestors,"  always  a  potent  force 
at  Rome,  favoured  this  conception  of  the  slave- 
class,  and  it  took  some  time  for  the  more  liberal 
theory  of  the  Stoa  to  win  acceptance  in  the  house- 
hold and  in  the  statute-book. 


(    172    ) 


CHAPTER  VII. 


EDUCATION,  MARRIAGE,  &C, 

In  our  last  chapter  we  gave  a  short  sketch  of 
the  component  parts  of  Roman  society.  We  shall 
now  go  through  the  life  of  the  individual  in  the 
same  way,  considering  in  their  order  the  chief 
points  connected  with  childhood,  education,  mar- 
riage, and  death.  In  this  case  also  we  shall  have 
to  be  content  with  a  brief  summary  of  a  very  wide 
subject. 

From  the  moment  when  he  first  saw  the  light, 
the  Roman  child  was  absolutely  under  the  power 
of  his  father.  As  the  family,  with  its  sacred  rites 
and  continuous  existence,  was  the  unit  of  society, 
so  the  pater  /ami lias  was  the  despotic  head  of  the 
group  he  represented.  As  he  had  called  his  child 
into  being,  so  it  rested  with  him  whether  that 
being  should  be  continued  or  not.  A  sickly  or 
deformed  child  was  generally  drowned  at  once,* 

*  Sen.  de  Ira.  1.  15.  2. 


"P ATRIA  POTESTAS."  173 

and  no  obligation  was  felt  to  rear  even  a  healthy- 
infant.  If  the  question  was  decided  in  its  favour, 
the  child  was  given  one  of  the  few  prccnomina  in 
use  at  Rome ;  the  sacred  ceremony  of  lustration  ad- 
mitted him  into  the  family  circle ;  the  golden 
token,  the  sign  of  free-birth,  was  hung  round  his 
neck ;  his  birth  was  entered  in  the  acta  diurna, 
and  formal  notice  of  the  same  given  to  the  Prefect 
of  the  Treasury.  Still  the  father  by  no  means  lost 
his  authority  over  the  person  of  the  child.  He 
might  punish  him  to  any  extent  he  liked,  sell  him 
as  a  slave,  or  put  him  to  death.  The  Romans  of 
our  period  recognised  the  anomaly  of  the  patria 
potestas,  and  noticed  that  it  was  peculiar  to  their 
own  code  ;  but  they  were  very  slow  to  modify  it. 
The  customs  of  their  ancestors  were  the  foun- 
dation of  their  greatness  :  "  Moribus  antiquis  stat 
res  Romana  virisque,"  as  old  Ennius  said,  and  it  is 
not  till  Hadrian's  time  that  we  find  a  man  banished 
for  putting  his  son  to  death. 

Education  was  begun  at  an  early  age.  A  boy 
was  first  sent  to  a  litterator — generally  a  slave  or 
freedman,  who  gave  him  a  general  instruction  in 
the  elements  of  reading,  writing,  arithmetic,  and 
Greek.    The  next  stage  was  the  school  of  the 


174  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  HOME. 

"  grammarian,"  where  the  boy  began  to  read 
standard  authors  in  both  languages,  such  as  (in 
our  period)  Homer,  Terence,  Virgil,  and  Horace. 
Passages  from  these  works  were  read  aloud  with 
the  appropriate  emphasis  and  intonation,  and  then 
learnt  by  heart.  Questions  were  set  on  criticism, 
geography,  mythology,  and  other  subjects.  Special 
attention  was  given  to  preparing  the  mind  of  the 
pupil  for  the  next  stage  of  his  education,  the 
lecture-room  of  the  rhetorician.  Suetonius  tells 
us  that  at  one  time  the  grammarian  used  to  teach 
rhetoric  himself,  but  in  our  period  he  generally 
left  that  subject  to  professed  rhetors,  who  received 
the  boy  after  he  had  completed  his  school  course. 
The  discipline  of  the  grammarians  was  severe, 
corporal  punishment  being  freely  applied  to  the 
idle  and  unruly.  Holidays  were  long  and  frequent. 
Besides  four  months'  vacation  in  the  year,  every 
feast-day  and  every  market-day  seems  to  have 
been  a  holiday,  a  system  which  approaches  closely 
that  of  some  of  our  public  schools. 

The  physical  side  of  education  was  not  neglected. 
Games,  as  ball  and  other  athletic  exercises,  were 
encouraged,  the  most  approved  being  the  old 
fashioned  martial  practice  in  the  Campus.    The 


EARLY  EDUCATION.  175 

Greek  palcestra  had  long  since  taken  root  in  Rome, 
but  it  remained  under  the  disapproval  of  those  who 
preserved  the  old  Roman  feeling.  The  unpractical 
nature  of  the  Greek  training,  the  object  of  which  was 
to  develope  beauty  rather  than  to  turn  out  good 
soldiers,  was  contrary  to  Roman  theory;  and  the 
moral  dangers  to  which  the  young  were  exposed 
in  the  palcestra  gave  a  still  stronger  reason  for  the 
prejudice.  Music  and  dancing  were  also  distrusted 
by  men  of  the  old  school,  as  derogatory  to  Roman 
gravitas;  but  both  were  taught  to  a  large  extent, 
and  even  girls  learnt  to  dance.  The  sweeping 
assertion  of  Cicero,  "  Nemo  saltat  sobrius  nisi 
forte  insanit,"  will  be  familiar  to  most  as  an  illus- 
tration of  Roman  feeling  on  this  point. 

On  the  moral  training  of  the  young  we  have  very 
conflicting  evidence.  On  the  one  hand  we  have 
such  sentiments  as  Juvenal's  often  quoted  "  Maxima 
debetur  pueris  reverentia,"  and  instances  of  careful 
enquiry  as  to  the  character  of  a  tutor  in  Pliny  the 
Younger  and  Quintilian;  while  on  the  other  we 
have  bitter  complaints  that  these  duties  were  not 
observed;  that  children  were  allowed  to  witness 
the  vices  of  their  parents,  and  that  no  care  was 
taken  as  to  the  morals  of  their  teachers,  who 


176  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

were  sometimes  guilty  of  shameful  abuse  of  their 
trust. 

The  toga  praetexta,  or  robe  of  childhood,  was 
laid  aside  for  the  ordinary  dress  of  the  adult  citizen 
at  about  the  age  of  fifteen.  No  definite  age  was 
fixed  by  law  or  custom,  but  the  theory  was,  that 
the  change  should  be  made  at  the  age  of  puberty. 
In  fact  it  varied  between  twelve  and  eighteen. 

The  transfer  of  the  boy  from  the  grammarian 
to  the  rhetorician  commonly  took  place  before  the 
assumption  of  the  toga  virilis,  about  the  14th  year. 
It  was  in  this  third  stage  that  the  pupil  was  to  pre- 
pare himself  for  the  duties  of  active  life.  This  was 
the  aim  of  Roman  education,  practical  here  as  in 
everything.  Public  speaking  was  the  chief,  almost 
the  only,  road  to  success  in  life  for  a  citizen  of  the 
better  class,  and  this  was  the  subject  to  which  he 
was  now  to  devote  his  energies.  Forensic  oratory 
was  not  only  the  chief  test  of  a  man's  accomplish- 
ments ;  it  was  of  the  utmost  practical  importance 
to  every  man  of  position  at  Rome.*  Accordingly, 
the  art  was  taught  with  a  systematic  seriousness 
unknown  at  the  present  day.     The  pupils  were 

*  Cf.  Tac.  Dial.  Or.  37,  wher^  he  says,  speaking  of  republican 
times,  that  no  one  could  attain  power  without  the  help  of  elo- 
quence. 


TEACHING  OF  RHETORIC.  177 

instructed  to  study  the  best  models,  and  to  declaim 
against  one  another  on  given  subjects,  the  master 
criticising  and  correcting  the  while.  Rules  of  ex- 
pression were  formulated,  and  figures  of  speech 
carefully  analysed  and  classified,  so  that  oratory, 
instead  of  being  left  to  the  light  of  nature,  as  it 
now  is,  was  raised  into  an  exact  science.  Not 
that  the  pupil's  whole  time  was  occupied  in 
learning  the  theory  of  rhetoric.  A  wide  range 
of  collateral  subjects  were  studied  for  the  sake 
of  illustration,  or  simply  to  expand  his  mind. 
In  particular,  he  generally  attended  the  lectures 
of  a  philosopher,  whose  duty  it  was  to  teach 
him  the  springs  of  morality,  and  mould  his  char- 
acter into  a  noble  shape.  It  was  hoped  that  the 
pupil  would  thus  be  led  to  think  for  himself, 
while  his  rhetorical  studies  would  enable  him 
to  give  just  expression  to  the  fruits  of  his  medi- 
tations. But  the  tendency  in  our  period  was  un- 
doubtedly to  give  too  exclusive  an  attention  to 
rhetoric,  the  more  practical  side  of  education.  Quin- 
tilian  complains  that  "  no  sooner  had  the  tongue 
become  an  instrument  of  profit  than  the  study  of 
morals  was  neglected,  or  left  to  weaker  intellects  ;"* 

*  Quint.  Inst.  Orat.  1. 1. 
M 


178  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  EOME. 

and  the  same  regrets  are  made  by  other  writers. 
Too  much  declamation  might  doubtless  be  inju- 
rious; but  if  the  due  proportion  was  kept,  the  Roman 
system  of  education  seems  well  conceived,  and  cal- 
culated to  produce  good  men  and  useful  citizens. 

It  was  very  common  for  young  men  to  travel 
after  completing  their  course  of  education  at  Rome. 
Athens,  especially,  was  very  often  visited,  and  the 
lectures  of  philosophers  and  rhetoricians  there  were 
numerously  attended.  Among  distinguished  men 
who  went  to  Athens  in  this  way  we  may  mention 
Cicero,  Atticus,  Horace,  and  Ovid. 

The  next  event  in  the  Roman's  life  which  we 
have  to  consider  is  marriage.  The  ancient  and 
venerable  forms  of  confarreatio  and  coemptio  had 
almost  died  out  in  our  time ;  and  most  marriages 
were  now  mere  civil  contracts,  dissoluble  at  plea- 
sure. From  the  woman's  point  of  view  this  loose 
form  of  alliance  had  considerable  advantages.  She 
did  not  pass  into  the  manus  of  her  husband,  and 
retained  the  control  over  her  property.  Marriages 
were  often  contracted  at  a  very  early  age.  We  hear 
of  bridegrooms  of  sixteen,  and  of  brides  of  twelve 
or  thirteen.  The  ordinary  age  was  from  about 
13  to  1 8  for  girls,  and  from  20  to  30  for  men.   The 


MARRIAGE.  179 


bride  had  little  or  no  choice  in  the  matter. 
The  bridegroom  arranged  the  matter  with  the 
girl's  father  in  a  formal  contract  by  the  words 
"  Spondesne  ?  "  "  Spondeo."  Friedlander  points  out 
that  the  Latin  language  contains  no  word  for  to 
ask  in  marriage.  It  is  a  little  curious  to  find  this 
refusal  of  liberty  of  choice  co-existing  with  the 
freedom  allowed  to  girls  in  other  respects.  They 
were  brought  up  in  much  the  same  way  as  boys, 
learning,  besides  their  own  tasks  of  the  distaff  and 
the  loom,  to  read  and  write  and  study  standard 
authors  under  the  eye  of  the  grammarians.  The 
husband  was,  however,  not  much  better  off  in  this 
respect.  In  most  cases  he  knew  nothing  of  his 
wife's  character  till  after  marriage ;  often  he  had 
hardly  seen  her  till  the  contract  was  completed. 
This  unfortunate  system,  which  has  always  been 
characteristic  of  southern  Europe,  caused  very 
many  ill-assorted  unions  and  subsequent  separa- 
tions. It  was  not  at  all  uncommon  to  betroth 
mere  children,  even  infants,  to  each  other;  the 
imperial  family  affords  several  instances  of  this. 

The  day  of  marriage  was  celebrated  at  Rome,  as 
in  almost  all  societies,  by  feasting  and  merriment. 
The  bride  was  arrayed  in  the  marriage -veil  and 
M  2 


180  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

girdled  tunica,  and  her  hair  was  arranged  in  six 
ringlets.  The  gods  were  consulted  by  sacrifice  and 
the  inspection  of  entrails ;  and  the  simple  nuptial 
ceremony  was  performed,  after  which  a  banquet 
was  held  in  the  house  of  the  bride's  father.  Then 
followed  the  escorting  of  the  bride  to  her  new  home, 
where  she  was  lifted  over  the  threshold  to  avoid 
the  possibility  of  an  ill-omened  stumble,  and  the 
ceremonies  ended  with  the  rude  "  Thalassio  "  song 
outside  the  bridal  chamber. 

Marriage  for  the  Roman  woman  meant  a  tran- 
sition from  rigid  seclusion  to  almost  unbounded 
liberty.  It  is  true  that  we  hear  of  unmarried  girls 
attending  the  theatre  and  public  spectacles,  and 
being  present  at  banquets  ;  but  these  appear  to  be 
exceptions  due  to  the  license  of  the  age,  and  the 
weight  of  evidence  shows  that  great  care  was  taken 
to  seclude  the  maiden  from  all  that  might  injure 
her  innocence.  In  republican  days  a  censor  had 
even  punished  a  citizen  of  rank  for  kissing  his  wife 
in  the  presence  of  his  daughter.  After  marriage, 
on  the  other  hand,  the  greatest  liberty  was  allowed 
to  the  wife.  She  appeared,  as  a  matter  of  course, 
at  her  husband's  table,  whether  he  had  company 
or  not ;  she  could  go  where  she  liked,  either  to  the 


FREEDOM  OF  MARRIED  WOMEN.  181 

temples  of  Isis  and  Serapis  or  to  the  circus  and 
amphitheatre;  she  had  her  own  troop  of  slaves, 
over  whom  she  ruled  without  interference;  she 
could  frequent  the  public  baths;  in  short,  no 
restraint  was  put  upon  her  except  such  as  her  own 
modesty  might  dictate. 

In  our  period  this  liberty  was  often  disgracefully 
abused.  It  has  been  pointed  out  by  more  than 
one  moralist,  that  in  times  of  national  corruption 
the  women  are  generally  more  vicious  even  than 
the  men.  It  was  so  at  Rome.  Not  to  mention 
the  painful  evidence  furnished  by  Martial  and  Juve- 
nal, the  mere  fact  that  we  find  such  expressions  as 
"  cuius  castitas  pro  exemplo  habita  est,"  speaks 
volumes  for  the  corruption  of  society.  But  on  this 
subject  we  need  not  here  dwell.  It  is  only  neces- 
sary to  mention  it  in  order  to  explain  that  strange 
phenomenon  of  Roman  life,  the  unexampled  fre- 
quency of  divorce.  We  are  assured  by  Seneca 
that  there  were  women  in  Rome  who  counted 
their  age  not  by  the  consuls,  but  by  their  husbands, 
and  by  Juvenal  that  one  had  married  eight  hus- 
bands in  five  years.  Divorce  was  resolved  upon 
on  the  slightest  pretext.  Cicero  put  away  Terentia 
apparently  because  he  had  a  rich  ward  whose  for- 


182  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

tune  he  coveted ;  many  separated  merely  from 
love  of  change,  disdaining  to  give  any  reason,  like 
iEmilius  Paullus,  who  told  his  friends  that  "  he 
knew  best  where  his  shoes  pinched  him."  Pas- 
sion and  avarice  were  of  course  the  most  common 
motives. 

Rich  wives  were  not  much  sought  after  by 
wise  men.  Their  complete  emancipation  made 
them  difficult  to  manage,  and  many  a  henpecked 
husband  acknowledged  the  truth  of  Martial's 
epigram — 

"  Uxorem  quare  locupletem  ducere  nolim 
Quaeritis  ?  Uxori  nutere  nolo  mes,'1 

and  exclaimed  with  Juvenal —  - 

"  Intolerabilius  nihil  est  quam  femina  dives." 

Accordingly,  since  rich  and  poor  wives  were 
both  objectionable,  the  large  majority  of  men 
never  married  at  all.  So  strong  was  the  aversion 
from  matrimony  that  neither  taxes  on  bachelors 
nor  rewards  to  fathers  had  any  effect.  In  repub- 
lican days  a  Metellus  had  expressed  the  common 
opinion  when  he  said,  "  If,  Romans,  we  could 
exist  without  a  wife,  we  should  all  avoid  the 
infliction,  but  since  nature  has  ordained  that  we 


A  VERSION  FROM  MA  RRIA  GE.  183 

can  neither  be  happy  with  a  wife  nor  exist  at  all 
without  one,  let  us  sacrifice  our  own  comfort  to 
the  good  of  our  country."  In  the  first  century, 
a.d.,  men  were  less  patriotic,  but  not  a  whit  more 
disposed  to  married  life. 

Single  or  married,  sooner  or  later  death  called 
away  the  Roman  from  his  labours  or  enjoyments. 
Too  often  the  last  scene  was  hastened  by  over- 
indulgence. The  reckless  life  which  most  men  of 
fashion  led  was  not  conducive  to  longevity,  and 
additional  dangers  beset  the  favourites  of  fortune 
in  the  avarice  of  a  bad  emperor  or  the  impatience 
of  greedy  relations.  But  be  the  cause  what  it 
might,  the  end  was  to  all  the  same  :  the  eyes  were 
closed  by  the  nearest  relation ;  the  cry  (concla- 
matio)  was  raised  to  indicate  that  life  had 
departed ;  and  the  now  lifeless  corpse  was  laid  out 
in  the  atrium  of  the  house,  arrayed  in  the  toga, 
and  often  decked  with  costly  ornaments.  This 
was  the  care  of  the  hired  undertaker  (libitinarius) 
and  his  assistant  (pollinctor),  whose  duty  it  was  to 
anoint  the  corpse  and  lay  it  out  in  the  manner 
described.     Every  citizen*  was  clad  in  the  toga 

*  Surely  not  "every  free  man,"  as  Becker.  The  passage  he 
quotes  refers  to  voluntary  disuse  of  the  toga  in  their  lifetime  by 
citizens. 


184  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

after  death :  the  senator  of  course  displayed  his 
broad  stripe,  and  the  triumphator  probably  his 
toga  picta  or  palmata.  A  chaplet  of  flowers  was 
sometimes  placed  on  the  brow  of  the  deceased. 
Nor  did  the  Romans  omit  the  dismal  mockery  of 
hired  mourners.  At  the  foot  of  the  bed,  wherever 
the  body  lay,  sat  two  waiting  women  {prozftcce) 
and  a  flute-player ;  by  the  side  stood  three  other 
mutes  with  dishevelled  hair,  beating  their  breasts 
in  token  of  grief.  These  persons,  the  slaves  of 
the  undertaker,  kept  watch  by  the  corpse  during 
the  greater  part  of  the  time  which  elapsed  between 
the  death  and  the  burial.  This  time  was  com- 
monly about  three  days.*  During  the  interval,  a 
branch  of  cypress  was  hung  over  the  door  or  laid 
in  front  of  it,f  to  indicate  a  house  of  mourning, 
lest  any  priest  should  incur  defilement  by  entering 
it.  At  the  end  of  this  period  the  funeral  ceremony 
took  place.  If  the  deceased  was  a  distinguished 
man,  a  crier  was  sent,  according  to  primitive 
custom,  through  the  streets,  with  the  words  "  This 

*  Another  authority  (Servius  ad  JEn.  5.  64)  says  seven  days, 
which  is  unlikely.  Perhaps,  as  with  us,  there  was  no  fixed 
interval. 

f  Cf .  Serv.  ad  Mn.  2. 71  i>  Becker's  translator  says,  "  A  cypress 
was  planted  near  the  house,"  which  is  absurd. 


FUNERAL  CEREMONIES.  185 

citizen  is  dead.  If  any  one  can  come  to  the 
funeral,  it  is  now  time.  He  is  being  borne  forth 
from  his  house."  Meanwhile,  the  bier  was  care- 
fully carried  out  of  the  door,  feet  foremost,  and  the 
strange  procession  set  out  on  its  way.  First  came 
a  band  of  flute-players,  whose  piping  made  a 
funeral  one  of  the  noisiest  things  in  Rome ;  then 
the  female  mourners  already  mentioned;  next 
came — strange  to  say — a  company  of  mimes  and 
dancers,  the  leader  of  whom  was  dressed  up 
to  imitate  the  deceased.  We  cannot  suppose  that 
this  class  of  persons  was  chosen  merely  as  being 
likely  to  personate  the  deceased  cleverly :  there 
must  have  been  an  odd  taste  for  the  incongruity 
of  comic  actors  taking  part  in  a  funeral  profession. 
In  fact,  they  were  not  expected  to  simulate  grief, 
but  often  amused  the  spectators  quite  in  the  man- 
ner of  their  profession.  The  best  story  about 
them  is  given  by  Suetonius,  when  he  is  describing 
the  splendid  funeral  of  Vespasian,  who  had  been 
notorious  for  his  parsimony.  During  the  proceed- 
ings the  managers  of  the  treasury  were  asked  how 
much  the  funeral  cost.  They  answered,  "  A  hun- 
dred thousand  pounds."  "  Give  me  a  thousand 
only,"  cried  the  pseudo- Vespasian,  and  throw  my 


186  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

body  into  the  Tiber  1 "  Behind  the  mimes  fol- 
lowed the  procession  of  ancestors.  The  wax 
masks,  representing  those  of  the  deceased's  family 
who  had  filled  any  curule  office,  were  taken  down 
from  the  niches  in  the  hall  where  they  usually 
stood,  and  assumed  by  suitable  persons,  who  also 
put  on  the  official  robes  of  the  magistrate  whom 
each  represented ;  and  thus  attired — "  the  trium- 
phator  in  his  gold-embroidered,  the  censor  in  his 
purple,  and  the  consul  in  his  purple-broidered  robe, 
with  their  lictors  and  the  other  insignia  of  office — 
all  in  chariots,  gave  the  final  escort  to  the  dead."* 
The  ceremony  must  have  been  half  grotesque, 
half  imposing,  the  one  feeling  or  the  other  predo- 
minating according  to  the  respect  felt  for  the 
deceased,  and  the  management  of  the  proces- 
sion. Behind  the  ancestors  came  the  corpse 
itself,  laid  upon  an  elevated  couch,  richly  adorned 
with  gold  and  purple.  Pictures  and  effigies  were 
often  carried  after  the  corpse.  Round  the  bier, 
in  their  newly-donned  caps  of  liberty,  walked 
the  slaves  whom  the  dead  man  had  emanci- 
pated by  his  will.  These  or  the  nearest  rela- 
tions of   the    deceased,   often  acted  as  bearers. 

*  Mommsen  Hist  of  Rome,  2.  395. 


FUNERAL  CEREMONIES.  187 

A  crowd  of  friends  and  spectators  followed  the 
bier. 

Thus  the  procession  slowly  proceeded  to  the 
Forum,  where  the  bearers  of  the  masks  took  their 
seats  in  the  curule  chairs,  and  the  couch  bearing 
the  body  was  laid  down.  Then  a  friend  or  relation - 
of  the  dead  man  pronounced  the  funeral  oration, 
celebrating  all  the  glories  of  his  ancestors,  and  all 
the  virtues  for  which  he  had  been  distinguished. 
The  eulogy  being  ended,  the  procession  resumed 
its  course  to  the  place  of  burial,  which,  by  a  law 
not  always  observed,  was  without  the  city- walls. 
There  a  pile  of  faggots  and  other  combustible  ma- 
terials awaited  them,  on  which  the  corpse  was 
reverently  laid.  Then,  while  the  waiting  women 
set  up  a  doleful  noise,  and  the  friends  of  the  dead 
man  threw  offerings  upon  the  pile,  the  nearest 
relation  applied  the  torch,  and  the  flame  soon 
spread  over  the  whole  structure.  During  the 
burning  it  was  not  unusual  for  rich  families  to 
celebrate  fights  of  gladiators.  When  the  pile  was 
burnt,  the  bones  were  carefully  collected,  sprinkled 
with  wine  and  milk,  then  dried,  and  placed  in  an 
urn,  with  perfumes  and  unguents.  The  urn  was 
then  placed  in  the  family  sepulchre,   which  was 


188  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

generally  by  the  side  of  one  of  the  great  roads  just 
outside  the  walls.  Formal  words  of  parting  were 
addressed  to  the  deceased,  and  the  company  dis- 
persed. 

This  is,  of  course,  a  description  of  the  most 
splendid  kind  of  funeral.  It  has  been  given  at  some 
length,  as  being  perhaps  the  most  characteristic 
picture  of  Roman  life.  We  should  add  that  the 
barbarous  custom  of  supplying  the  dead  man  with 
the  implements  he  used  in  life — ornaments,  wea- 
pons, money,  &c. — was  largely  observed,  so  that 
the  interior  of  a  family  sepulchre  sometimes  re- 
sembled an  ordinary  dwelling-house.  The  poorer 
classes  were  content  with  much  simpler  obsequies. 
They  often  made  use  of  "  dove-cots,"  (columbaria), 
in  which  a  niche  received  each  urn.  Burial  clubs, 
which  were  very  common,  possessed  these  colum- 
baria, and  assigned  places  in  them  to  their  mem- 
bers. The  lowest  class  of  all — abject  slaves  and 
friendless  outcasts — were,  it  is  to  be  feared,  often 
left  unburied,  or  lightly  covered  with  earth  in 
the  most  hasty  manner.  Burial,  as  opposed  to 
cremation,  was  not  by  any  means  unknown  at 
Rome.  Some  families,  e.  g.,  the  patrician  gens 
Cornelia,  always  practised  it. 


THE  FUNERAL  BANQET.  igg 

The  funeral  banquet  consisted  of  two  parts : 
first,  the  silicernium,  which  was  held  near  the 
grave,  and  then  the  cena  novendialis,  which  took 
place  at  the  house  of  the  dead  man.  Sacrifices 
and  games  were  often  held  in  his  honour  at  the 
same  time. 


(    190    ) 


CHAPTER  VIIL 

— ♦— 

DAILY    LIFE. 

It  is  an  unfortunate  necessity  for  any  one  who 
tries  to  write  about  the  habits  and  manners  of  the 
Romans  that  he  must  confine  himself  almost 
exclusively  to  the  upper  classes.  Copious  as  are 
the  materials  for  the  subject,  they  all  bear  on  one 
section  of  society.  We  can  form  a  very  clear  idea 
of  most  of  the  occupations  and  amusements  of  the 
senator,  the  knight,  and  the  millionaire  ;  but  we 
know  next  to  nothing  about  the  humble  trades- 
man and  poor  client.  The  obscurity  of  low  life  is 
scarcely  illumined  by  a  ray  of  light,  either  from 
literature  or  monuments.  It  is  a  poor  consolation 
to  say  that  this  silence  is  itself  highly  characteristic  ; 
that  the  structure  of  Pagan  civilisation  was  really 
based  on  a  foundation  of  crushed  and  forgotten 
humanity  ;  we  still  wish  to  know  how  the  despised 
masses  lived,  the  "  leaches  of  the  treasury,"  who 
received  their  daily  dole  of  bread  from  Govern- 


RICH  AND  POOR.  191 

ment,  and  carried  their  scanty  earnings  to  the  hos- 
pitable popina,  with  its  savoury  fumes  of  tripe  and 
garlic.  But  our  curiosity  must  remain  unsatisfied. 
Rome  has  given  us  no  Dickens  to  paint  the  trials 
and  the  humours  of  her  slums  for  our  instruction  ; 
the  empire  did  not  even  produce  a  second  Plautus. 
Perhaps  after  all  we  have  got  what  is  most  impor- 
tant. The  life  of  the  toiler  cannot  differ  very  much 
from  one  age  to  another.  The  dull  routine  of 
hard  mechanical  labour,  the  struggle  for  bare 
existence,  the  sordid  amusements,  were  the  lot  of 
the  inhabitants  of  the  crowded  Suburra,  as  of  the 
East  End  of  London.  What  we  more  miss  is  some 
account  of  the  manners  of  the  middle  class,  the 
respectable  but  not  too  successful  tradesmen,  the 
struggling  professional  men,  and  the  small  men  of 
business.  These  classes  have  before  now  pre- 
served a  country  from  the  fate  which  a  corrupt 
aristocracy  was  bringing  upon  it ;  and  we  should 
like  to  know  whether  they  lived  an  honest  and 
healthy  life  at  Rome,  amid  the  flood  of  vice  and 
degradation  around  them.  But  the  rich  are  in 
most  respects  the  best  representatives  of  a  civilisa 
tion ;  they  have  the  opportunity  of  putting  into 
practice  the  floating  aspirations  of  the  community, 


192  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

and  of  employing  for  their  own  benefit  the  mgi> 
nuity  and  industry  of  the  less-favoured  classes. 
Their  habits  are  thus  the  best  gauge  of  the  attain 
ments  of  their  country  in  civilisation,  and  of  the 
character  which    that    civilisation   has    assumed. 
Only  we  may  be  sure  that  a  picture  drawn  from 
the  manners  of  the  aristocracy  is  not  better,  but 
worse,  than  the  truth  as  regards  the  whole  nation. 
We  in  England    should    readily  admit  this.    A 
short    time    ago    there    appeared  in  a  monthly 
periodical  an  article  entitled,  "  How  the  Rich  live." 
The  description  there  given  of  the  day  of  an  idle 
and  wealthy  English  family  bears  a  fairly  close 
resemblance  to  the  records  of  the  day  of  a  Roman 
noble,  as  collected  from  contemporary  authors. 
If  anything,  the  first  century  seems  to  have  the 
advantage  over  the  nineteenth,  inasmuch  as  the 
Roman  professed  to  give  some  part  of  the  morn- 
ing to  serious  occupation,  while  the  Englishman, 
according  to  the  writer  in  question,  devotes  the 
short  interval  between    breakfast  and  lunch  to 
sport  or  idleness.     In    gluttony  the    two    seem 
about  on  a  par,  the  main  part  of  the  day  in  both 
cases  being  given  up  to  the  pleasures  of  the  table. 
We  feel  how  unjust  and  misleading  such  a  descrip- 


ENGLISH  AND  ROMAN  LUXURY.  193 

.ion  would  be  if  exhibited  as  a  picture  of  English 
civilisation  as  a  whole.  It  is  possible  that  gluttony 
^.ay  be  a  national  temptation  with  us,  but  we 
should  justly  object  to  see  it  brought  forward 
as  our  chief  characteristic.  Still  more  should  we 
/eel  the  injustice  of  leaving  out  of  sight  all  our 
national  virtues — our  industry  and  integrity,  and 
whatever  else  we  love  to  credit  ourselves  with. 
Yet  this  is  what  we  are  obliged  to  do  in  the  case 
of  the  Romans.  The  "  daily  life  of  the  Romans  " 
means  the  daily  life  of  Atticus  and  Pliny,  or  of 
Apicius  and  Trimalchio.  We  can  say  nothing, 
because  we  know  nothing,  of  the  common-place 
but  useful  and  industrious  lives  of 'humbler  citizens. 
We  shall  do  the  Romans  injustice,  and  imbibe 
false  ideas  ourselves,  unless  we  remember  that  we 
are  describing  a  small  section  of  society,  not  the 
whole.  Let  us  keep  in  mind  the  wide  differences 
of  habits  which  exist  in  our  own  community,  and 
we  shall  then  be  less  likely  to  join  in  the  hasty 
and  sweeping  denunciations  which  have  been 
poured  upon  Roman  civilisation.  An  exclusive 
study  of  the  manners  of  the  aristocracy  would,  we 
admit,  give  a  very  false  and  unfavourable  impres- 
sion of  the  character  of  English  society.    Let  us 

N 


194  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

remember  that  our  knowledge  of  Roman  lit*  I 
confines  us  to  a  one-sided  description  of  this  kin 
and  that  it  is  no  more  true  to  say  that  the  Roman 
working-day  was  over  by  mid-day  than  that  tlK 
English  day  begins  with  a  ten  o'clock  breakfast 
With  this  preparatory  warning  we  will  begin 
to  describe,  as  best  we  may,  the  course  of  the 
Roman  day. 

An  undisturbed  night's  rest  was  almost  one  c 
the  privileges  of  the  rich  at  Rome.  The  owner  c 
a  large  mansion  could  place  his  bed-chamber  out 
of  hearing  of  the  streets.  The  rest  of  the  citizens 
had  hardly  composed  themselves  to  rest  after  the 
last  diner-out  and  serenader  had  ceased  to  make 
sleep  impossible  by  their  drunken  songs  and 
doleful  ditties,  when  the  coin-stamper  began  to 
hammer  on  his  anvil,  the  schoolmaster  to  fulmi- 
nate at  his  noisy  class,  and  the  hapless  throng  of 
clients  to  hurry  through  the  streets  to  pay  their 
respects  to  their  patron.  Those  who  had  not  to 
perform  this  troublesome  duty  might  consult  their 
own  tastes  as  to  the  hour  of  rising.  The  elder 
Pliny  was  usually  at  work  by  seven  or  eight,  if  not 
earlier,  but  others  might  prefer  to  sleep  off  the 
fumes  of  last  night's  Falernian  till  a  much  later 


THE  MORNING  HOURS.  195 

hour.  Persius  gives  a  not  very  pleasant  picture 
of  a  young  gentleman  of  this  kind  whom  his  friend 
finds  still  in  bed  near  mid-day.  It  was  the  good 
old  custom  for  the  household  to  meet  at  an  early 
hour  for  "  family  prayer,"  as  we  may  call  it.  The 
paterfamilias  offered  a  sacrifice  at  the  household 
altar  with  his  wife,  children,  and  slaves  standing 
round.  His  clients  and  friends  came  in  at  this  time 
to  pay  their  morning  call,  and  the  patron  was 
often  willing  to  discuss  their  affairs  with  them,  and 
give  them  advice  and  assistance.  This  is  the 
pleasant  side  of  the  picture ;  in  many  cases  the 
"  officia  antelucana "  were  equally  degrading  to 
patron  and  client. 

At  about  nine  the  salutations  were  over,  and 
men  who  had  any  business  to  do  began  their 
work.  A  large  number  found  their  way  to  the 
Forum,  either  as  pleaders,  judges,  or  spectators  in 
the  numerous  law-suits :  many  went  to  attend  a 
marriage,  funeral,  sacrifice,  or  birth-day  feast, 
at  a  friend's  house  ;*  others  set  themselves  to  kill 
time  till  dinner  by  dancing,  dice-playing,  drinking, 
or   other    frivolous    amusements ;    many  betook 

*  For  the  engrossing  character  of  these  social  duties,  cf .  Plin. 
Ep.  1.  9. 

N  2 


196  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

themselves  straight  to  one  of  the  great  public 
baths,  or  to  the  more  manly  exercises  of  the 
Campus  Martius.  Before  setting  out  to  any  of 
these  occupations  it  was  usual  to  take  a  light  meal 
called  jentaculum,  consisting  generally  of  wine, 
dates,  olives,  cheese,  &c,  but  sometimes  also  of 
meat. 

The  next  event  in  the  day  was  the  prandium  or 
mid-day  meal,  also  called  merenda,  which  was 
more  like  a  substantial  lunch  than  a  breakfast,  at 
least  in  rich  households.  It  was  followed  by  the 
siesta,  which  the  climate  of  Italy  made  almost 
necessary.  This  generally  lasted  about  an  hour, 
after  which  most  people  took  a  bath.*  This 
might  take  up  the  time^till  about  three  o'clock, 
when  it  was  already  not  too  early  to  think  about 
the  great  event  of  the  day,  the  cena. 

We  shall  reserve  some  of  the  points  connected 
with  this  meal  for  the  chapter  on  luxury,  for 
nowhere  else  did  extravagance  and  self-indulgence 
shew  themselves  in  so  rampant  a  form.  The 
cena  was  actually  the  last  event  of  the  day, 
beginning  about  three  o'clock,  and  lasting  till  late 
evening,  if  not  past  midnight.    Three  hours  was 

*  The  baths  are  described  in  the  chapter  on  Amusements. 


THE  "  CENA.n  197 


apparently  the  shortest  time  that  a  rich  man  took 
over  his  dinner.  But  we  must  here  remember 
what  we  said  at  the  beginning  of  the  chapter. 
The  working  man's  dinner  must  have  been  a  very 
different  affair.  We  do  not  know  whether  he 
took  it  at  the  same  time;  if  he  did,  we  may  be 
sure  that  his  business  called  him  back  long  before 
six  o'clock.  But  the  rich,  as  we  said,  remained  at 
the  table  all  the  afternoon  and  evening.  Hospi- 
tality was  well  kept  up,  so  that  it  seems  probable 
that  it  was  the  exception  to  dine  alone.  The 
ordinary  number  at  a  dinner  party  was  nine. 
This  was  probably  determined  by  the  size  of  the 
tables  and  couches,  three  reclining  on  each  of 
three  sides,  but  the  number  has  always  been  found 
a  pleasant  one  for  conversation.  If  a  larger 
number  were  invited,  more  tables  were  prepared. 
The  place  of  honour  at  table  was  "  imus  in  medio  I' 
the  right-hand  corner  of  the  middle  couch,  while 
the  host  occupied  the  adjoining  place  "summus  in 
imo."  This  gradation  of  places  was  part  of  the 
etiquette  of  the  dinner  table,  which  was  carried  to 
a  great  and  indeed  tiresome  extent,  so  that  a  man 
unused  to  society  found  himself  embarrassed  and 
ridiculed  for  his  ignorance  of  the  rules  of  behaviour. 


198  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

The  absence  of  knives  and  forks  made  it  difficult 
to  eat  gracefully,  and  the  boor  was  recognized  by 
the  way  in  which  he  smeared  his  face  and  hands 
with  the  viands.  A  spoon  was  the  only  imple- 
ment used  by  the  guests,  though  the  carver — a 
slave,  of  course — used  a  knife.  Each  guest  brought 
a  napkin  to  wipe  his  hands.  The  custom  of  re- 
clining, with  the  left  elbow  resting  on  a  cushion, 
was  now  universal  for  men ;  women  and  children 
sat,  the  position  being  considered  more  proper. 
This,  however,  like  most  customs  founded  on 
modesty,  was  often  transgressed  in  our  period. 
Round  tables,  called  sigmata,  were  sometimes  used 
in  imperial  times,  the  couches  being  then  curved 
so  as  to  fit  them.  These  accommodated  from  five 
to  eight  persons.  The  invitations  to  dinner  were 
sent  by  means  of  a  slave  called  vocator,  but  the 
guests  were  often  permitted  to  bring  friends  of 
their  own,  who  were  called  umbrce.  These 
inferior  persons  were  usually  relegated  to  the 
imus  lectus.  The  guests  came  dressed  in  a  festive 
attire  called  synthesis,  the  shape  of  which  is  not 
known.  It  was  often  of  brilliant  colours,  scarlet, 
green,  or  purple,  and  ostentatious  people  some- 
times changed  it  several  times  during  an  evening. 


TABLE-TALK.  199 


Of  the  materials  of  the  banquet  we  hope  to  speak 
in  another  place ;  it  consisted  of  three  parts,  the 
promidsis  or  gustatio,  intended  to  whet  the 
appetite  and  aid  the  digestion;  the  cena  proper, 
which  might  consist  of  any  number  of  courses 
from  one  to  eight  or  more,  and  the  dessert.  The 
conversation  during  the  meal  commonly  turned 
on  the  public  spectacles,  the  comparative  skill  of 
famous  gladiators,  or  jockeys,  and  the  prospects  of 
the  different  colours  at  the  coming  races.  These 
topics  were  the  more  popular,  as  offering  no 
handle  to  the  treachery  of  the  delator,  who  might 
take  advantage  of  the  festivity  of  the  evening, 
and  report  an  unguarded  utterance  as  treason  to 
the  emperor.*  Small  talk  might,  however,  flag 
during  so  long  a  meal;  and  accordingly  it  was 
usual  to  have  music  between  or  during  the  courses. 
Slaves  were  educated  especially  with  the  view  to 
entertain  guests  in  this  way,  and  those  who  had 

*  Horace  mentions,  as  a  sample  of  small   talk,  "Thrax   est 
gallina  Syro  par  ?  "     See  also  Mart.  1.  48.  . 

"  De  prasino  conviva  meus  venetoque  loquatur, 
Nee  faciunt  quemquam  pocula  nostra  reum." 

Paley  takes  this  couplet  in  the  opposite  sense,  as  if  the  circus 
were  the  most  danyerous  topic  of  conversation ;  a  view  which 
seems  very  improbable. 


200  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

none,  hired  musicians  for  the  occasion.  Martial, 
however,  like  Socrates,  preferred  a  dinner  without 
music.  Dancing,  rope-dancing,  juggling,  and  jest- 
ing were  also  introduced  for  the  amusement  of  the 
company,  and  not  unfrequently  the  host  took  the 
opportunity  of  reading  or  reciting  his  own  com- 
positions to  his  guests,  who  felt  that  they  were 
earning  their  dinner  when  they  applauded  each 
point  in  the  tragedy  or  epic,  written  on  both  sides 
of  the  parchment,  and  even  then  not  finished. 
Sometimes  standard  authors,  or  the  last  new 
popular  poem,  were  read  or  recited,  and  this  was 
probably  the  chief  acquaintance  with  literature 
that  the  man  of  society  obtained.  The  conver- 
sation, when  it  reached  more  serious  topics  than 
sport,  was  probably  clever,  ready,  and  sparkling. 
The  constant  intercourse  of  society  and  the 
method  of  education  were  both  likely  to  produce 
wit  and  conversational  power.  The  Romans  had 
no  newspapers,  except  the  Acta  Diurna,  which 
was  under  government  supervision,  and  they  relied 
to  a  great  extent  on  the  talk  of  the  dinner  table  to 
keep  them  supplied  with  the  news  of  the  day,  the 
state  of  foreign  politics,  the  newest  domestic 
scandal,   and  the  latest  literary  sensation.    Con- 


NEWS  AND  GOSSTP.  201 

versation  thus  took  the  place  of  the  daily  press, 
the  society  journal,  and  the  literary  review.  It 
was  also  made  to  do  duty  as  a  novel,  and  the 
"  raconteurs,"  tellers  of  anecdotes,  amusing  "  Mile- 
sian stories,"  and  witty  epigrams,  were  much 
sought  after  in  society.  The  capital  prided  itself 
greatly  on  its  sprightly  humour,  and  the  word 
urbanitas  expresses  the  ready  wit  in  which  it 
excelled.  Domitius  Marsus  wrote  a  book  "  de 
Urbanitate"  which  was  probably  a  collection  of 
good  repartees,  and  rules  for  bringing  them  out. 
Other  persons,  who  were  not  so  gifted,  might 
make  it  their  business  to  collect  the  latest  in- 
telligence, and  when  occasion  offered  pour  forth 
information  from  every  province  in  the  empire, 
like  the  telegram-column  in  our  daily  newspapers. 
These  walking  bulletins  were  not  always  much 
more  appreciated  than  the  meddlesome  busybodies 
nicknamed  "  Ardeliones,"  who  were  among  the 
pests  of  Roman  society.  It  is  to  be  feared  that 
the  retailers  of  scandal  were  more  readily  listened 
to,  and  that  the  talk  of  the  dinner  table  was  a 
dreaded  danger  to  all  who  had  a  character  to  lose. 
License  of  speech  and  freedom  from  restraint  were 
encouraged  by  the  deep  potations  which  accom- 


202  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

panied  the  feast  from  the  beginning  to  the  end. 
It  was  usual  to  drink  in  the  Greek  fashion,  t.e., 
according  to  fixed  rule,  one  of  the  party  being 
chosen  (generally  by  dice)  the  master  of  the 
revels,  to  settle  how  much  wine  was  to  be  drunk, 
and  in  what  proportion  it  was  to  be  mixed  with 
water.  The  wine  was  handed  round  by  pages 
generally  selected  for  their  beauty.  It  was  prized 
according  to  its  kind  and  age.  Setinian  and 
Caecuban  were  accounted  the  best,  then  Falernian. 
Some  wine  was  preserved  as  long  as  a  hundred 
years  or  more,  the  date  being  attested  by  the  label 
on  the  bottle.  Contests  in  drinking  were  not 
uncommon,  and  a  strong  head  was  considered  a 
thing  to  be  proud  of.*  Drinking  of  healths  was 
much  practised,  the  guests  generally  pledging  their 
absent  mistresses ;  these  potations  were  sometimes 
continued  even  till  the  morning  light,  and  the 

*  Excessive  drinking  was  a  common  vice  at  Rome,  though  the 
wine  of  the  ancients  seems  not  to  have  produced  such  degrading 
effects  as  beer  and  spirits.  Pliny  the  Elder  tells  us  a  good  deal 
about  the  devices  which  were  adopted  to  excite  thirst :  some,  he 
says,  drank  hemlock,  that  they  might  be  obliged  to  drink  wine  to 
save  their  lives  ;  others  took  pumice-stone  powdered  up,  or  other 
doses.  Tiberius  went  to  see  a  man  of  Mediolanum,  who  could 
swallow  17  pints  at  a  draught.  The  emperor  himself  was  no 
mean  proficient  in  the  art,  and  his  son  Drusus  inherited  his 
gifts. 


LIFE  IN  THE  COUNTRY-HOUSE.  203 

peaceable  citizen  often  had  his  slumbers  broken 
by  a  reveller  returning  home. 

So  ended  the  day  of  the  rich  idler  at  Rome. 
In  the  country  a  simpler  and  more  healthy  way  of 
life  prevailed,  but  the  same  general  plan  was 
adhered  to.  Hospitality  was  not  neglected  in  the 
country-houses,  and  birthdays,  anniversaries,  or 
religious  festivals  gave  frequent  excuses  for  enter- 
tainments. In  the  country  a  man  had  more 
opportunity  for  indulging  his  private  tastes,  and 
was  less  bound  by  the  trammels  of  society.  We 
have  two  interesting  descriptions  of  the  habits  of 
men  of  rank  and  wealth  but  of  high  character, 
who  were  able  thus  to  map  out  their  day  accord- 
ing to  their  own  ideas.  Pliny  the  Younger 
describes  the  life  of  Spurinna,  an  old  man  who 
had  retired  from  active  life.  It  was  his  custom  to 
rise  at  seven,  and  walk  three  miles,  the  time 
being  occupied  by  talking  or  reading  aloud  as  he 
walked.  Then  after  a  short  rest,  with  a  book  or 
conversation,  he  drove  with  his  wife  or  a  friend 
about  seven  miles.  Next  he  walked  again  about 
a  mile,  then  spent  the  time  till  two  or  three  in 
writing.  The  hour  for  the  bath  was  three  in 
winter,  two  in  summer.     He  prepared  himself  for 


204  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

it  by  walking  naked  in  the  sun,  and  by  active 
exercise  at  ball.  After  the  bath  he  rested  and 
listened  to  light  reading  till  dinner  was  announced 
(later,  be  it  observed,  than  the  ordinary  hour  at 
Rome),  and  this  as  usual  occupied  the  rest  of  the 
day.  By  these  habits,  says  Pliny,  he  had  pre- 
served his  health  and  vigour  till  the  age  of  seventy- 
seven.  The  other  description  we  also  owe  to 
Pliny.  It  is  that  of  the  life  of  his  uncle,  the 
author  of  the  "  Natural  History."  Like  Spurinna, 
Pliny  was  a  very  early  riser,  and  when  at  Rome 
often  visited  Vespasian  in  the  small  hours,  for  he, 
too,  used  to  work  at  night.  Then  he  read  and 
wrote  till  the  time  for  the  siesta,  spending  part  of 
the  time  lying  in  the  sun  and  taking  notes  from  a 
book  which  was  read  to  him.  He  bathed  before 
the  siesta,  not  at  the  usual  time,  and  after  it 
worked  again  till  dinner  time.  During  dinner  a 
book  was  read,  and  the  insatiable  student  even 
made  notes  between  his  mouthfuls.  He  rose 
early  (i.e.  before  nightfall)  from  dinner,  and 
apparently  worked  again.  This  extraordinary 
mode  of  life  was  carried  on  not  only  in  the 
country  but  at  Rome.  Its  results  were  seen  in  a 
perfect  library  of  books  on   every  subject,  from 


PLINT8  DAY.  205 


physical  science  to  rhetoric,  from  history  to 
cavalry  drill.  We  must  be  cautious  of  generalizing 
from  such  an  exceptional  character,  but  intellectual 
industry  was  a  real  feature  of  Roman  civilisation, 
and  many  who  never  produced  anything  original 
took  a  superficial  interest  in  literature,  and  devoted 
some  hours  every  day  to  hearing  books  read  aloud 
or  attempting  to  write  themselves. 


(    206    ) 


CHAPTER  IX. 

AMUSEMENTS, 

The- Roman  populace,  according  to  Juvenal,  cared 
for  only  two  things — Bread  and  the  public  shows. 
Without  the  former  they  could  not  exist ;  without 
the  latter  they  would  have  felt  their  lives  not 
worth  living.  The  circus  and  the  amphitheatre 
were  indeed  an  absolute  necessity,  both  to  the 
people  and  to  the  government.  To  the  people 
they  furnished  the  means  of  passing  idle  days  in 
pleasure  and  excitement ;  to  the  emperor  they 
gave  the  opportunity  of  diverting  the  minds  of 
his  subjects  from  political  affairs,  and  of  supplying 
them  with  less  dangerous  food  for  rivalry  and 
discussion.  "Allow  them,  Caesar,"  said  Pylades, 
"  to  excite  themselves  about  us,  for  then  they  do 
not  think  about  politics."*  It  has  been  justly 
remarked  that  the  spectacles  under  the  Empire 

*  Macrob.  2.  7.  Kal  axapiffTtii,  fiaaiXiii ;  iaaov  avrovi   rrepi 
■>)pu~   acr\o\tia9at,  &c. 


POLITICAL  DEMONSTRATIONS.  207 

supplied  to  a  great  extent  the  place  of  the  Comitia 
under  the  Republic.  They  gave  the  only  oppor- 
tunity for  the  citizens  to  meet  together  in  the  mass 
and  express  their  opinions  on  any  subject.  At  a 
time  when  literature  was  gagged,  when  political 
meetings  and  secret  societies  were  alike  suppressed, 
when  even  private  speech  was  silenced  by  fear  of 
the  delator,  there  still  remained  the  "license"  of 
the  circus  and  the  amphitheatre,  which  enabled 
the  Roman  people  to  make  its  will  known,  and 
often  to  wrest  compliance  from  a  reluctant 
emperor.  The  shouts  of  the  assembled  thousands, 
carefully  organised  beforehand,  on  several  occa- 
sions procured  the  revocation  of  an  unpopular  edict, 
or  the  punishment  of  a  hated  minister.  Even 
Tiberius  was  induced  by  the  shouts  of  the  people 
to  restore  a  statue  which  he  had  removed  from 
the  baths  of  Agrippa  and  set  up  in  his  own 
palace.*  The  Emperors  were  not  always,  how- 
ever, so  compliant.  Augustus  refused  to  repeal 
his  marriage  law  in  deference  to  the  popular 
clamour,  and  Caius  even  seized  and  put  to  death 
the  ringleaders  of  a  similar  demonstration.  In 
general,  however,  no  restrictions  were  put  upon 

*  Plin.  H.  N.  34.  62. 


208  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

this  license,  which  seems  to  have  increased  in 
the  later  period  of  the  empire.  Tertullian,  for 
instance,  speaks  of  ridicule  and  abuse  directed 
against  the  Emperor  himself,  as  a  common  occur- 
rence at  the  games ;  but  of  this  we  find  no  trace 
in  the  first  century.  These  demonstrations  were, 
as  we  have  said,  organized  beforehand,  and  it 
stands  to  reason  that,  in  cases  where  the  people 
were  not  of  one  mind,  rival  shouts,  each  trying  to 
drown  the  other,  were  raised  from  different  sides. 
Sometimes  the  government  tried  to  utilize  the 
custom  for  its  own  purposes.  Titus  is  said  to  have 
hired  persons  to  demand  in  the  theatre  the  death  of 
men  whom  he  suspected  and  wished  to  get  rid  of.* 
Private  malice  was  sometimes  indulged  by  shout- 
ing scandalous  insinuations  at  the  games,  and  this 
was  punished  as  a  very  malicious  form  of  libel. 

But  if  the  spectacles  were  a  political  necessity, 
they  played  a  far  more  important  part  as  the 
amusement  of  an  idle  population.  How  much 
space  they  filled  in  the  life  of  the  metropolis  may 
be  estimated  when  we  enumerate  the  various 
feasts  on  which  they  were  given.    The  number  of 

*  Suet.  Tit  6.  Titus,  however,  was  not  yet  emperor  when  ho 
did  this. 


NUMBER  OF  PUBLIC  HOLIDAYS.  209 

these  holidays  was  constantly  increasing.  Under 
Tiberius  it  had  already  reached  eighty-seven  days, 
and  before  the  end  of  the  century  it  probably 
exceeded  one  hundred.  But  these  numbers  only 
represent  the  regular  festival-days.  There  were 
also  the  extraordinary  fetes,  which  occurred  very 
frequently,  and  were  sometimes  prolonged  to  an 
inordinate  length  of  time.  Thus  the  opening  of 
the  Colosseum  was  celebrated  by  a  fete  of  one 
hundred  days,  and  Trajan,  in  106,  gave  one 
which  lasted  one  hundred  and  twenty-three  days. 
In  the  time  of  Aurelius  the  dies  fasti  had  been 
reduced  to  two  hundred  and  thirty.  Such  was  the 
life  which  the  rulers  of  the  world  chose  for  them- 
selves, and  which  the  subject  provinces  had  to 
support  by  the  fruits  of  their  labour.* 

The  spectacles  which  were  enacted  on  these 
numerous  holidays  were  principally  of  three  kinds. 
First  in  importance,  and  for  a  long  time  in  popu- 
larity, were  the  combats  of  gladiators  and  wild 
beasts  in  the  arena.     Next  were  the  horse  races  in 

*  The  frequency  of  spectacles,  of  course,  varied  in  different 
reigns.  Tiberius  is  said  never  to  have  given  a  show  of  gladiators 
himself,  and  to  have  rarely  attended  such  exhibitions.  Hence  the 
rush  to  see  the  spectacle  at  Fidena,  given  by  Atilius,  a  freedman, 
which  led  to  the  disaster  there. 


210  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

the  circus,  which  at  last  evoked  even  more  enthu- 
siasm than  the  "games"  of  the  amphitheatre. 
And  lastly  the  dramatic  exhibitions,  which,  in  the 
degraded  form  of  pantomime,  were  almost  as 
popular  as  the  fiercer  forms  of  entertainment.  To 
these  must  be  added  the  varied  class  of  street 
entertainments,  such  as  mountebanks,  jugglers, 
and  street  musicians ;  and  the  illuminations  which 
were  given  in  honour  of  special  occasions.  This 
last  class  will  not  require  much  space;  but  the 
three  great  entertainments  of  the  arena,  the  circus, 
and  the  theatre,  call  for  more  detailed  attention. 

Of  the  gladiatorial  shows,  which  we  shall  con- 
sider first,  we  have  already  spoken  in  a  former 
chapter.  The  remarks  we  then  made  were 
directed  to  the  moral  effects  of  this  singular  insti- 
tution, and  to  the  indications  which  it  gives  of  the 
state  of  feeling  then  prevailing  on  the  subject  of 
humanity.  We  shall  now  approach  the  same 
subject  from  a  different  point  of  view,  and  consider 
the  games  of  the  amphitheatre  as  one  of  the  three 
great  amusements  of  the  Roman  populace. 

The  origin  and  early  history  of  the  games  need 
not  detain  us.  The  tradition  which  ascribes  their 
invention  to  Etruria  is  supported  by  evidence,  and 


GLADIATORS.  211 


we  may  regard  it  as  certain  that  this  was  one  of 
the  evil  legacies  that  Rome  inherited  by  the 
absorption  of  their  peculiar  people.  In  the  be- 
ginning of  our  period  they  had  already  gained 
immense  popularity,  and  were  spreading  over  the 
provinces,  till  even  Greece,  which  had  long  refused 
to  tolerate  them,  boasted  its  amphitheatre. 

The  combatants  in  the  arena  belonged  to  four 
classes — slaves,  prisoners  of  war,  condemned  crimi- 
nals, and  free  men  who  voluntarily  entered  the 
profession.  The  exposure  of  slaves  was  eventually 
forbidden.  That  of  prisoners  was  justified  by  the 
harsh  law  of  antiquity.  Criminals  were  con- 
demned to  fight,  as  an  aggravation  of  the  capital 
sentence,  for  no  discharge  or  quarter  was  allowed 
them.*  It  was  sometimes  suspected  that  innocent 
persons  were  occasionally  condemned  to  this 
punishment  in  order  to  make  up  the  number  of 
combatants,  and  when  we  hear  of  300  criminals 
exposed  at  one  time,  it  must  be  confessed  that 
there  were  grounds  for  the  suspicion.  The  fourth 
class  of  volunteers  was  composed  of  various 
elements.     Libertines   who  had   exhausted  their 

*  A  popular  prince  would,  however,  sometimes  grant  even  a 
criminal  to  the  request  of  the  populace.     Suet.  Ner.  12. 

O  2 


212  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

fortunes,  inexperienced  young  men  who  were 
inveigled  into  joining  a  school  of  gladiators,  des- 
peradoes of  all  kinds,  submitted  themselves  to  the 
stern  discipline  of  the  lanistce,  and  took  the  oath 
which  bound  them  to  submit  to  be  burnt  alive, 
beaten,  or  killed  with  the  sword  at  the  bidding  of 
the  trainer.  Some  embraced  the  profession  from 
mere  love  of  fighting  or  of  notoriety,*  and  the 
rewards  which  could  be  won  by  a  successful 
swordsman  were  enough  to  tempt  even  the  am- 
bitious. 

The  training  through  which  the  gladiator  went 
was  methodical  and  severe.  He  was  hardened  to 
bear  pain  by  being  beaten  with  rods  and  whips. 
His  diet  was  regulated  with  a  view  to  increase  to 
the  utmost  his  strength  and  activity.  He  was 
constantly  practised  in  the  use  of  the  weapons  he 
was  to  use  in  the  arena,  and  great  attention  was 
paid  to  bearing  and  deportment,  which  were 
almost  as  much  criticised  as  skill  in  fencing.  On 
the  day  of  the  combat  he  was  attired  in  splendid 
armour  and  furnished  with  richly  adorned  weapons; 
nothing  was  omitted  which  could  add  to  the  effect 

*  Lucian  introduces  a  story  of  a  Scythian  who  offered  himself 
as  a  gladiator  in  order  to  earn  10,000  sesterces  to  help  a  friend  in 
distress. 


COST  OF  THE  SHOWS.  213 

of  his  appearance,  or  enhance  the  brilliance  of  the 
show.  The  expense  of  all  this  preparation  and 
equipment  fell  ultimately  on  the  giver  of  the 
games,  who  was  either  the  emperor,  or  an  aspirant 
to  public  office,  or  sometimes  (especially  in  the 
country  towns)  a  wealthy  parvenu.  Some  rich 
men  kept  gladiators  of  their  own,  and  these,  on 
more  than  one  occasion,  displayed  a  fidelity  and 
devotion  to  their  master  which  fills  us  with 
surprise.  The  cost  of  a  show  was,  of  course, 
immense,  and  was  felt  to  be  a  burden  even  by 
the  wealthy  Roman  aristocracy.  Many  able  men 
were  debarred  from  public  life  through  their  in- 
ability or  unwillingness  to  incur  the  expense  ;  and 
at  last  (though  not  in  our  century)  it  became 
difficult  to  find  qualified  persons  to  take  the 
highest  magistracies.  A  great  part  of  the  money 
passed  through  the  hands  of  the  lanistoz,  who 
often  contrived  to  make  large  fortunes  out  of 
their  disreputable  trade.*  Large  salaries  were 
also  paid  to  celebrated  swordsmen,  and  hand- 
some presents  were  given  them  besides  their  re- 
gular pay.  Sometimes  "  rudiarii,"  or  discharged 
gladiators,  were  induced  to  re-enter  the  arena  for 

•  Cf.  Marl.  11.  63. 


214  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

a  large  sum.*  When  we  consider  the  expense  of 
providing  wild  beasts  from  Asia  and  Africa,  f  and 
the  presents  which  were  often  scattered  broadcast 
among  the  spectators,  we  are  almost  disposed  to 
wonder  that  private  fortunes  could  ever  endure 
such  a  drain. 

The  social  position  of  the  gladiator  bore  some 
resemblance  to  that  of  the  jockey  in  some  circles  of 
modern  England.  His  trade  was  always  considered 
a  mean  one,  but  the  passion  for  sport  raised  the  suc- 
cessful performer  into  a  hero,  so  that  the  champion 
"secutor"  or  "  retiarius  "  divided  with  the  heroes  of 
the  circus  the  honour  of  being  more  talked  about 
than  any  one  else  in  Rome.  The  stigma,  however, 
still  remained.  It  was  rare  for  the  sons  of  gladiators, 
even  when  rich,  to  hold  official  positions ;  and  those 
who  left  the  arena  without  having  saved  money 
often  sank  to  the  lowest  depth  of  poverty  and 
misery. 

It  is  not  difficult  to  conjure  up  a  picture  of  the 
Colosseum  on  a  festival  day.  80,000  human  beings 

*  Tiberius  (Suet.  Tib.  7)  paid  100,000  sesterces  a  piece  to  rudi- 
arii  to  induce  them  to  fight  in  one  of  his  spectacles. 

f  This,  however,  generally  fell  on  the  provincials,  who  were 
forced  to  contribute  animals  for  the  games  under  the  name  of 
vectigal  aedUiciwn. 


SCENE  IN  THE  AMPHITHEA  TUE.         215 

are  there  assembled  in  their  holiday  attire,  the 
citizens  crowned  with  garlands  and  in  white  robes, 
the  senators  with  their  broad  purple  stripe,  and 
behind  them  the  motley  crowd  of  all  nations  and 
costumes,  the  vestals  in  their  seat  of  honour  next 
to  the  arena,  the  emperor  with  his  suite  in  the 
podium,  —  all  sit  intent  on  the  brilliant  scenes 
enacted  in  the  centre  of  the  vast  building,  scenes 
varied  by  every  device  of  art  and  ingenuity,  and 
continued  in  an  unbroken  succession  from  sunrise 
to  sunset.  Now  a  duel  between  a  "  secutor  "  and 
a  "  retiarius,"  produces  splendid  feats  of  agility 
and  dexterity;  now  the  " parmularii"  and  the 
adherents  of  the  larger  shield  "back"  their  re- 
spective factions  with  clamorous  shouts  ;  now  the 
arena  is  suddenly  filled  by  troops  of  armed  men,  who, 
concealed  in  vaults  beneath,  seem  to  rise  by  magic 
from  the  earth;  now  a  crowd  of  savage  beasts — 
captured,  some  in  the  Soudan,  some  in  Central  Asia, 
some  in  the  wild  regions  of  the  north — are  let  loose 
to  fight  and  kill  each  other :  now  some  wretched 
criminal  is  exposed,  tied  to  a  stake,  to  be  lacerated 
by  a  bear  or  a  bull,  or  burnt  in  the  tunica  molesta; 
now  Scaevola,  in  the  person  of  an  unhappy  male- 
factor, allows  his  right  hand  to  be  consumed  in 


216  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

the  "Tuscan  fire";  now  the  whole  arena  is  sub- 
merged, and  a  sea-fight  enacted  with  all  the  pic- 
turesque evolutions  of  ancient  naval  warfare.  Such 
were  some  of  the  exhibitions  which  captivated  the 
Roman  populace.  We  shudder  at  the  cruelty,  but 
we  can  well  understand  the  terrible  fascination 
which  such  spectacles  must  have  exerted. 

The  Great  Circus,  which  filled  the  valley  between 
the  Palatine  and  Aventine  Hills,  was  probably  the 
most  stupendous  building  ever  erected  for  public 
spectacles.  It  held  at  different  periods  150,000, 
250,000,  and  lastly  380,000  spectators,  the  second 
of  these  figures  referring  to  the  time  of  Titus,  and 
the  last  to  the  fourth  century.  The  space  enclosed 
by  this  enormous  structure  was  used  for  several 
purposes.  Besides  the  horse  races,  which  were 
the  main  entertainment  provided  for  those  who 
attended  the  circus,  gladiatorial  combats  on  a  large 
scale  were  performed  there,  and  sometimes  athletic 
contests  were  held  in  the  circus  instead  of  in  the 
stadia  built  for  the  purpose.  But  the  chariot  races 
were  the  main  attraction,  and  it  was  for  these  that 
the  arrangements  of  the  circus  were  designed.  All 
round  the  course  tiers  of  seats  rose  one  behind 
the  other  to  a  great  height,  the  pulvinar  of  the 


Cn A  RIOT  RACES.  217 

emperor  being  placed  in  the  most  advantageous 
position  for  seeing  both  the  beginning  and  the  end 
of  the  race.  Down  the  middle  of  the  course  ran 
the  spina,  a  low  wall  with  metce.  or  turning  posts 
at  each  end,  these  last  being  composed  of  three 
conical  pillars  set  on  a  pedestal.*  The  number  of 
rounds  run  was  registered  by  the  simple  contrivance 
of  seven  balls,  one  of  which  was  placed  on  f  the 
spina  at  the  end  of  each  "lap".  The  stalls  where 
the  horses  were  kept  were  at  one  end  of  the 
course,  behind  the  starting  point.  The  racecourse 
had  this  advantage  over  ours  in  England,  that  the 
spectators  never  lost  sight  of  the  horses,  which 
came  round  and  round  several  times  before  the  end 
of  the  race.  It  is  difficult  to  imagine  any  spectacle 
more  exciting  to  a  frivolous  populace  than  these 
circenses.  From  sunrise  to  sunset,  day  after  day 
during  festivals,  which  sometimes  lasted  from  one 
week  to  another,  the  Roman  people  could  regale 
themselves  with  a  ceaseless  succession  of  chariot 
races.  We  hear  of  twelve,  and  even  of  twenty- 
four  courses  being  run  in  a  single  day,  the  latter 
being  apparently  the  more  usual  number;   and 

*  Metasque  imitata  cupressus.     Ov.  M.  10.  106. 
j-  Or,  perhaps,  taken  off  it.    Varro  R.  R.  1.  2.  §  11. 


218  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

when  we  reflect  on  the  length  of  the  course,  which 
was  ordinarily  seven  times  round  the  circus,  we 
are  forced  to  the  conclusion  that  not  less  than 
twelve  hours  of  the  day  must  sometimes  have  been 
taken  up  by  the  actual  races,  without  making 
any  allowance  for  intervals.*  It  was,  however, 
usual  to  allow  four  intervals,  the  principal  at  mid- 
day, during  which  the  spectators  might  retire  for 
refreshment  or  short  exercise.  I  am  not  aware 
that  we  hear  of  any  arrangement  corresponding  to 
our  "  keeping  places,"  though  we  know  that  the 
struggle  for  good  seats  was  very  keen,  and  that  the 
crowds  were  wont  to  assemble  many  hours  before 
the  races  began :  but  we  hear  of  locarii  being  paid 
to  take  seats  beforehand  for  those  who  could  not 
come  early,  and  possibly  spectators  employed  their 
slaves  to  prevent  others  from  occupying  their 
places  during  their  absence.  The  interest  of  the 
races  was  not  confined  to  trials  of  speed  among 

*  Friedlander  calculates  the  length  of  the  course  at  1\  kil., 
and  the  time  occupied  by  each  race  at,  at  least,  half-an-hour.  I 
am  disposed  to  regard  this  last  estimate  as  rather  too  high,  for  we 
hear,  as  he  tells  us  himself,  of  48  courses  being  run  in  a  single  day 
on  an  exceptional  occasion,  a  feat  scarcely  compatible  with  this 
estimate  of  time,  even  if  we  adopt  his  supposition  that  the  length 
of  the  courses  was  shortened  on  this  occasion.  Guhl  and  Koner 
estimate  25  minutes  as  the  duration  of  a  race. 


FACTIONS  OF  THE  CIRCUS.  219 

the  horses.  Skill  and  chance  both  played  an  im- 
portant part,  and  the  clanger  which  attended  every 
race  added  zest  to  the  enjoyment  of  the  spectators. 
The  reliefs,  and  other  representations  of  races  which 
have  come  down  to  us,  nearly  all  represent  chariots 
overturned  and  men  and  horses  struggling  in  wild 
confusion  on  the  ground.  Such  accidents  must 
have  been  very  frequent  in  rounding  the  sharp 
turn  at  the  end  of  the  spina,  and  we  are  not  sur- 
prised to  hear  of  dangerous  and  even  fatal  acci- 
dents suffered  by  the  drivers.  But  the  main  ex- 
citement was  due  to  the  existence  of  factions 
pledged  to  favour  one  of  the  four  parties  into  which 
the  competitors  were  divided.  These  parties  were 
named  after  four  colours,  red,  white,  blue,  and  green, 
and  every  charioteer  was  attached  to  one  of  these 
parties,  and  wore  its  colours  on  the  day  of  the 
race.  Two  of  the  colours,  the  red  and  the  white, 
were  eclipsed  during  our  period  by  the  other  two, 
so  that  the  chief  rivalry  was  between  the  blues 
and  the  greens.  These  two  colours  divided,  one 
may  say,  the  whole  population  of  Rome,  and  pro- 
duced as  keen  a  rivalry  and  party  spirit  as  had 
ever  been  evoked  by  the  constitutional  struggles 
of  better  days.     This   monstrous   absurdity  was 


220  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

growing  rapidly  during  the  whole  of  the  first  cen- 
tury, but  it  did  not  reach  its  height  till  long  after. 
It  was  reserved  for  the  new  Rome  of  Constantine 
to  see  its  streets  deluged  with  the  blood  of  its 
citizens  slain  in  tumults  excited  by  these  coloured 
rags.*  In  our  period  the  evil,  though  great  enough, 
did  not  reach  gigantic  proportions.  The  Romans 
of  the  early  Empire  were  generally  content  to  shew 
their  interest  in  their  party  by  lavish  expenditure 
on  training,  by  extravagant  rewards  to  drivers  who 
had  led  their  colours  to  victory,  and  by  exalting 
Scopus  and  Incitatus  and  Andrsemon  to  a  celebrity 
which  the  most  popular  poets  could  not  hope  to 
rival.  The  drivers  could  make,  Juvenal  says,  as 
much  money  as  a  hundred  advocates,  and  if  they 
escaped  being  crushed  or  dashed  to  pieces  on  the 
racecourse,  might  look  forward  to  a  comfortable 
retirement  after  a  few  years  of  danger,  excitement, 
and  notoriety.  Their  social  position,  though  higher 
than  that  of  the  gladiator,  was  still  a  low  one.  Most 
of  them  were  either  slaves,  or  of  the  rank  just 
above  slavery;  and  it  was  considered  highly  dis- 
reputable for  a  Roman  citizen  of  rank  to  exhibit 

*  The  Nika  sedition,  in  which  30,000  persons  are  said  to  have 
perished,  is  described  with  great  power  by  Gibbon,  ch.  40. 


NOTORIETY  OF  THE  JOCKEYS.  221 

himself  in  the  costume  of  a  jockey.  So  great,  how- 
ever, was  the  enthusiasm  evoked  by  the  racecourse 
that  even  senators  and  knights  could  not  be  re- 
strained from  appearing  in  the  circus.  When  we 
remember  the  manner  in  which  Juvenal  speaks  of 
a  consul  who  drove  his  own  carriage  on  the  high 
road,  we  can  form  some  idea  of  the  scandal  which 
this  practice  caused,  and  the  mischief  which  the 
degradation  of  the  upper  classes  in  the  racecourse, 
as  in  the  arena,  inflicted  on  society  in  general. 
When  a  Roman  lost  his  sense  of  dignity  and  self- 
respect  he  lost  that  which  produced  the  best 
features  of  his  character,  and  probably  nothing 
did  more  to  break  the  ties  of  nationality  in  the 
city  than  the  shameless  participation  of  some  of 
the  nobility  in  these  spectacles.  Except  for  this, 
we  cannot  regard  the  circus  as  an  altogether  per- 
nicious institution,  considering  the  condition  of  the 
population  of  Rome.  It  did  harm,  no  doubt,  in 
fostering  the  idleness  to  which  they  were  prone, 
but  it  may  be  questioned  whether,  if  the  races  had 
not  existed  to  act  as  a  safety  valve  for  the  popular 
factiousness,  graver  political  dangers  might  not 
have  arisen.  At  all  events,  in  so  far  as  they  out- 
bid in  popularity  the  far  more  horrible  and  de- 


222  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

grading  shows  of  the  amphitheatre,  we  may  admit 
that  they  did  some  service. 

It  might  be  supposed  that  the  enthusiasm  which 
the  gladiatorial  games  and  the  races  of  the  circus 
excited  among  the  people  left  them  no  time  for 
other  amusements.  But  though  the  theatre  never 
quite  rivalled  either  of  these  in  popularity,  the 
Romans  of  the  first  century  were  very  far  from 
indifferent  to  this  form  of  entertainment.  On  the 
contrary,  they  found  time  amid  their  other  diver- 
sions to  take  a  very  strong  interest  in  dramatic 
exhibitions,  and  even  to  extend  to  favourite  actors 
some  of  the  partisan  spirit  which  they  shewed  to 
distinguished  jockeys  and  gladiators.  The  theatre 
always  remained  a  highly  important  feature  in 
Roman  life. 

There  is,  perhaps,  no  better  indication  of  the 
character  of  a  nation  than  its  stage.  In  our  own 
history,  the  drama  of  the  Elizabethan  era,  of  the 
Restoration,  and  of  the  present  day,  all  present  a 
faithful  image  of  the  current  taste  of  the  time  to 
which  they  belong.  The  same  may  be  said  of  the 
modern  French  drama.  We  shall  therefore  ap- 
proach the  subject  of  the  Roman  stage  with  great 
interest,  as  one  of  the  most  important  portions  of 


THE  STAGE.  223 


our  subject.  The  taste  of  the  people  in  dramatic 
exhibitions  will  enable  us  to  lay  our  finger  on 
more  than  one  of  the  salient  features  of  their 
social  life. 

Suetonius  speaks  of  three  theatres  in  Rome.* 
They  were  called  after  Pompey,  Balbus,  and  Mar- 
cellus,  and  probably  held  from  50,000  to  80,000 
spectators.  They  were  arranged  in  the  form  of  a 
semicircle,  with  rows  of  seats  rising  to  a  great 
height,  so  as  to  accommodate  the  greatest  possible 
number  of  spectators.  The  size  of  the  theatre 
must,  however,  have  made  hearing  difficult,  and 
placed  genuine  drama  at  a  disadvantage.  Perhaps 
the  popularity  of  the  mimes,  of  which  we  shall 
speak  presently,  was  partly  due  to  this.  Gesticu- 
lation may  be  seen  and  appreciated  where  dialogue 
can  be  only  imperfectly  heard. 

The  old  Atellan  farce  still  maintained  its  popu- 
larity among  the  lower  classes.  The  well-known 
characters — Maccus,  the  amorous  old  scoundrel; 
Dossennus  the  swindling  soothsayer;  Bucco,  the 
babbling  fool,  still  exhibited  their  familiar  charac- 
teristics in  new  and  old  combinations.  These  pro- 
totypes of  the  Italian  comedy  of  the  middle  ages, 

*  Suet.  Aug.  44. 


224  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

and  of  our  modern  pantomime,  were  always 
popular  with  the  masses  at  Rome,  whose  tastes 
were  further  consulted  by  a  large  admixture  of 
grossness  and  ribaldry  in  the  performance.  The 
mime,  properly  so  called,  seems  to  have  differed 
only  slightly  from  the  Atellan  farce.  It  admitted, 
however,  a  somewhat  wider  field  of  subjects,  and 
thus  enabled  the  playwright  to  spice  his  drama 
with  profanity  as  well  as  indecency,  or  to  horrify 
his  audience  by  skilful  imitations  of  scenes  of 
torture.  The  accounts  we  possess  of  these  repre- 
sentations seem  to  indicate  an  extremely  low  and 
degraded  taste  on  the  part  of  the  populace.  Such 
intellectual  pleasure  as  was  sought  was  derived 
chiefly  from  audacious  sallies  against  the  first  prin- 
ciples of  morality,  or  from  jests  directed  against 
the  gods ;  while  the  plot  generally  turned,  as  in 
French  fiction  of  the  present  day,  on  the  successful 
violation  of  the  marriage  tie  and  the  discomfiture 
of  the  injured  husband.  But  the  main  attraction 
of  the  mime  was  even  a  lower  one  than  this.  That 
shameless  freedom  of  speech,  which  Martial,  him- 
self one  of  the  greatest  offenders  against  decency, 
praises  as  "  Romana  simplicitas,"  was  here  exer- 
cised to  its  fullest  extent,  and  even  the  eyes  were 


POLITICAL  ALLUSIONS.  225 

gratified  by  the  most  disgraceful  exhibitions  under 
pretext  of  the  license  of  the  Floralia.* 

It  is  necessary  to  say  thus  much  on  the  subject, 
because  a  profane  and  immoral  stage  is,  as  we  have 
said,  a  sure  sign  of  an  irreligious  and  corrupt 
society,  and  it  is  impossible  to  omit  so  important 
a  feature  in  the  life  of  the  epoch.  There  was, 
however,  another  use  to  which  the  mimes  were 
put.  We  have  already  mentioned  the  license 
taken  by  the  assembled  people  in  the  circus  and 
amphitheatre  of  expressing  their  wishes  in  the 
presence  of  the  emperor  if  they  wanted  any  law 
repealed  or  unpopular  minister  punished.  We 
said  then  that  disrespectful  cries  directed  against 
the  emperor  himself  were  almost  unknown  in  the 
first  century,  though  common  afterwards.  But 
the  Roman  people  needed  some  means  of  satirising 
their  rulers,  and,  as  even  the  "  licentia  circi"  had 
its  limits,  some  other  and  less  direct  way  had  to 
be  found  for  expressing  what  could  not  be  said 
openly.  This  was  found  in  the  mimes  and  farces. 
An   allusion,  however  guarded,  to  the  emperor's 

*  Ovid,  Tristia  2.  497-520,  pleads  vigorously  and  not  un- 
reasonably against  the  inconsistency  which  condemned  so  severely 
his  own  erotic  poetry,  while  it  tolerated  the  more  mischievous 
grossness  of  the  stage. 

P 


226  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

personal  habits  or  conduct  was  at  once  caught  up 
and  loudly  applauded  by  the  audience.  So  custo- 
mary was  this  species  of  innuendo  that  the  most 
innocent-sounding  lines  might  be  taken  as  covert 
allusions  to  scandals,  which  it  would  have  been 
treason  to  speak  of,  and  the  author  might  thus 
shelter  himself  under  the  plain  meaning  of  his 
words.  This  kind  of  ingenuity  was  especially 
suited  to  the  Italian  mind,  and  was  exercised  not 
only  in  the  theatre,  but  in  the  court  of  justice. 
For  instance,  Cicero  tells  us  that  on  one  occasion 
the  court  seized  on  the  number  53,  which  a 
witness  gave  as  the  distance  in  miles  of  his  farm 
from  Rome,  shouting  "  Ipsa  sunt,"  remembering, 
he  says,  that  this  was  the  amount  of  money  he 
had  taken  as  a  bribe.  These  allusions  were  intro- 
duced into  the  Atellan  farce  as  well  as  into  the 
mimes.  They  were  not  without  danger  to  the 
author  and  actor.  A  luckless  poet  was  burnt  alive 
by  Caligula  for  a  line  which  seemed  to  contain  a 
covert  jest  on  himself,  and  an  actor  was  banished 
from  Italy  by  Nero  for  a  like  offence.  Helvidius 
Priscus,  the  younger,  was  executed  by  Domitian 
for  a  play  which  seemed  to  allude  to  the  emperor's 
recent  divorce. 


EDICTS  A  GA  INST  PL  A  YERS.  227 

The  popularity  of  these  indecent  exhibitions, 
which  had  formerly  been  patronized  only  by  the 
vulgar,  was  the  subject  of  constant  complaints  by 
the  praetors.*  Tiberius,  in  one  of  those  ebullitions 
of  high-handed  morality  with  which  we  are  familiar 
in  ancient  and  especially  in  Roman  history,  issued 
an  edict  expelling  all  players  from  Italy.  This, 
however,  probably  belonged  to  that  class  of  prohi- 
bitory edicts,  which,  as  Tacitus  says,  were  always 
being  issued  and  never  really  enforced.  It  was 
impossible  to  deprive  the  people  of  so  popular  an 
amusement.  The  law  seems  to  have  been  repealed 
by  Caligula,  and  reissued  at  least  once  before  the 
end  of  the  century. 

The  subject  of  these  dramas,  if  they  deserve  the 
name,  was  often  mythological,  seldom  historical, 
generally  amatory.  It  was  common  to  take  some 
legend  which  contained  materials  for  erotic  scenes, 
and  to  elaborate  them  to  suit  the  popular  taste. 
The  writers  of  the  plays  were  generally  men  of 
small  literary  capacity ;  but  sometimes  good  poets, 
such  as  Lucan  and  Statius,  did  not  disdain  to  turn 
their  hand  to  this  species  of  composition.  We 
also  hear  of  adaptations  from  existing  works.    For 

*  Tac.  Ann.  4.  14. 
P  2 


228  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

instance,  scenes  from  Ovid,  very  likely  from  the 
Metamorphoses,  were  introduced  in  the  mime. 

A  large  part  of  the  art  of  the  pantomime  con- 
sisted in  dancing.  The  dance  was,  however,  as 
much  the  work  of  the  arms  and  of  the  whole  body 
as  of  the  feet.  It  was  accompanied  by  gesticula- 
tion, which  was  brought  to  such  perfection  that  in 
the  pantomime  proper  the  help  of  words  and  even 
of  music  was  dispensed  with,  and  the  whole  scene 
enacted  in  dumb  show.  It  this  surprises  us,  we 
must  remember  that  the  Italians  have  always  been 
celebrated  for  their  use  of  gestures.  At  Naples,  at 
the  present  day,  every  emotion  has  its  appropriate 
sign,  and  the  inhabitants  can  convey  the  expres- 
sion of  their  admiration,  defiance,  or  any  other 
feeling,  by  the  use  of  the  hand  only.  The  same 
custom  prevailed  at  Rome,  as  is  shewn,  amongst 
other  things,  by  the  interesting  description  in 
Plautus  (Miles  Gloriosus,  Act  2,  Scene  2)  of  a  man 
engaged  in  deliberation  with  himself!  The  panto- 
mimes further  elaborated  this  system  of  signs,  so 
that  a  clever  actor  had  no  difficulty  in  carrying  his 
audience  with  him.  The  system  had  this  advan- 
tage that  the  language  of  signs  is  common  to  all 
nations,  while  the  actor  was  generally  a  Greek  or 


TEE  PANTOMIME.  229 

Egyptian,  and  his  audience,  perhaps,  a  motley 
crowd  from  all  nations  of  the  empire.  The  chief 
requisites  for  success  in  a  pantomime  were  a  hand- 
some and  well-formed  person,  grace  of  movement, 
and  power  of  adapting  himself  to  any  part, 
including  those  ol  women.  The  most  celebrated 
dancers,  Pylades  and  Bathyllus,  possessed  these 
attributes  to  perfection,  and  succeeding  artists 
were  accustomed  to  take  their  names  as  an 
assumption  of  championship  in  the  profession.  It 
was  usual  for  an  actor  to  take  more  than  one  part, 
sometimes  without  changing  his  mask  ;  but  this 
was  probably  exceptional,  and  merely  an  exhibi- 
tion of  versatility. 

The  social  position  of  the  actor  or  dancer 
resembled  somewhat  that  of  the  circus  driver. 
Roman  tradition  was  very  strong  against  allowing 
actors  any  social  status  at  all.  They  long  re- 
garded all  such  professions  t  with  the  same  con- 
tempt that  Englishmen  until  lately  felt  for  them.* 
The  law  was  called  in  to  impose  ignominious 
penalties  on  an  actor  who  intruded  in  any  way 

*  See  an  amusing  passage  in  one  of  Lord  Chesterfield's  letters  : 
"  If  you  are  fond  of  music  it  is  well :  get  a  Frenchman  or  an 
Italian  to  twang  and  whistle  to  you  ;  but  never  let  me  see  you 
with  a  pipe  in  your  mouth,  or  a  fiddle  under  your  chin." 


230  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

into  the  classes  above  him.  Corporal  punishment 
was  freely  employed  upon  his  person.  He  was 
ranked  with  slaves  and  barbarians.  Any  Roman 
citizen  who  appeared  on  the  stage,  except  in  an 
Atellan  farce,  was  liable  to  be  adjudged  in/amis. 
As  a  natural  consequence  he  generally  was  a  slave 
or  freedman,  or  a  native  of  some  country  where 
his  profession  was  more  esteemed,  such  as  the 
Greek  colonies  and  the  East  generally.  His 
notoriety  did  not  do  much  towards  raising  his 
legal  status,  though  in  some  cases  a  brilliant  actor 
won  for  himself  a  distinguished  position  in  actual 
life,  and  accumulated  a  large  fortune.  He  might 
rise  to  high  favour  at  Court,  and  hope  for  large 
presents  in  money  from  the  emperor.  In  many 
cases  he  would  attach  himself  to  the  imperial 
troupe,  which  was  generally  the  best  in  Rome. 
In  this  way  even  political  power  was  not  out  of 
his  reach,  and  socially  he  might  hold  a  brilliant 
position,  and  be  courted  by  senators  and  magis- 
trates. In  spite  of  this,  however,  his  profession 
always  remained  under. a  ban;  and  should  his 
popularity  cease  he  might  find  himself  reduced  to 
a  position  little  better  than  that  of  an  ordinary 
slave. 


COMEDIES  AND  TRAGEDIES.  231 

The  mime  and  the  Atellan  farce  were  so  much 
the  most  important  kinds  of  dramatic  exhibition 
that  we  need  not  detain  ourselves  long  with  the 
higher  kinds  of  entertainment.  The  palliatce  or 
Greek  comedies  lingered  on  without  much  suc- 
cess ;  tragedy  was  moribund,  and  only  resuscitated 
by  the  help  of  brilliant  scenery  and  imposing 
names,  in  the  style  of  modern  Shakespeare 
revivals.  Tragedies  were,  indeed,  written  by 
hundreds  ;  but  they  were  not  intended  for  the 
stage,  and  the  personal  friends  of  the  author  were 
usually  his  reluctant  auditors. 

Among  the  minor  spectacles  the  most  important 
were  the  athletic  contests,  commonly  exhibited, 
as  we  said  above,  in  stadia  prepared  for  the  pur- 
pose, but  sometimes  in  the  circus.  It  was  a  long 
time  before  these  Greek  amusements  naturalized 
themselves  on  Roman  soil,  and  in  our  period  they 
excited  a  comparatively  languid  interest,  though 
some  emperors  encouraged  them.  The  contests 
were  arranged  in  Quinquertia,  in  imitation  of  the 
Greek  Pentathlon,  and  consisted  of  running,  leap- 
ing, wrestling  or  boxing,  throwing  the  quoit,  and 
the  javelin.  We  may  also  mention  here  the  fetes 
and  illuminations,  generally  accompanied  by  pre- 


232  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

sents  to  be  scrambled  for  by  the  crowd,  which 
served  to  amuse  the  populace  in  the  intervals  of 
more  serious  spectacles.* 

The  transition  from  public  exhibitions  to  the 
bath  is  not  so  great  as  may  at  first  appear.  The 
public  bath  ought  certainly  to  be  classed  among 
the  amusements  of  the  Roman  populace.  It 
occupied  a  very  large  amount  of  time  in  the  life  of 
every  citizen,  and  perhaps  the  greater  number 
indulged  in  it  every  day.  This  luxury  was  a  late 
product  of  Roman  civilisation.  The  primitive 
Romans  only  took  a  bath  on  market-days,  f  con- 
tenting themselves  with  more  partial  ablutions  in 
the  meantime.  At  the  end  of  the  republic  more 
luxurious  manners  had  come  in.  It  was  already 
the  custom  to  bathe  for  pleasure  rather  than  for 
cleanliness,  and  a  bath-room  was  already  a 
necessary  adjunct  of  every  large  house.  Public 
baths  on  a  humble  scale  were  already  numerous. 
These  were  probably  private  speculations,  and  the 
price    of   admission   was    a  quadrans.    Agrippa 

*  These  gparsiones  formed  a  regular  part  of  the  circenses.  A 
refinement  was  to  throw,  not  the  presents  themselves,  but  num- 
bered tickets,  which  entitled  the  possessor  to  a  prize,  sometimes  of 
considerable  value. 

t  Sen.  Ep.  86. 


THE  PUBLIC  BATHS.  233 

was  the  first  to  introduce  one  of  those  splendid 
structures  which  afterwards  occupied  no  small 
part  of  the  city  of  Rome.  These  thermae  were 
provided  not  only  with  air  and  water  baths  of 
every  kind,  but  included  gymnasia,  exedrce,  or 
lecture  rooms  for  poets  and  rhetoricians,  walks 
and  plantations,  fountains  and  statues,  ball-courts, 
vestibules,  porticoes,  and  probably  libraries — 
everything  in  fact  that  the  bathers  could  want 
to  amuse  them  after  the  bath  or  prepare  them 
for  it.  It  is  perhaps  worth  noticing  that  the 
example  of  Agrippa  was  not  followed  for  a  whole 
generation,  the  next  thermce  being  those  of  Nero. 
Merivale  suggests  that  the  greater  publicity  of  the 
thermae  offended  the  dignity  of  the  Roman,  who 
was  still  ashamed  to  strip  in  public  except  for  the 
actual  bath.  If  this  feeling  still  existed  under 
Augustus,  it  certainly  disappeared  very  quickly, 
and  before  the  end  of  the  century  the  thermae 
became  a  most  important  and  popular  institution 
at  Rome.  Of  the  magnificence  of  these  buildings 
it  is  impossible  to  speak  too  highly.  The  86th 
letter  of  Seneca  gives  a  glowing  description  of  the 
plebeian's  bath.  The  walls  blazed,  he  tells  us, 
with  precious  marbles,  the  chambers  were  adorned 


234  SOCIAL  LIFE  TN  ROME. 

on  every  side  with  gorgeous  mosaics,  the  water 
was  discharged  from  silver  taps  into  marble  basins 
— in  fact,  he  adds  with  rhetorical  hyperbole,  our 
feet  disdain  to  tread  except  on  precious  stones. 
It  is  well  to  try  to  form  a  mental  conception  of 
such  a  building,  surpassing,  probably,  in  magnifi- 
cence anything  that  Europe  has  now  to  show,  and 
then  to  remember  that  there  were  several  of  these 
establishments  in  the  capital,  and  all  of  them  open 
to  the  meanest  citizen  on  payment  of  the  smallest 
coin  in  the  currency,  or  in  many  cases,  absolutely 
gratis.* 

The  Romans  were  not  slow  to  avail  themselves 
of  the  advantages  thus  thrown  open  to  them.  We 
hear  of  persons  bathing  as  many  as  seven  times  a 
day,f  and  a  daily  bath  was,  as  we  have  said,  the 
rule.  The  afternoon  was  the  usual  time  of  the 
day ;  and  Hadrian  even  forbade  any  except  invalids 
to  bathe  before  two  o'clock.^    The  courts  of  the 

*  It  was  a  common  act  of  liberality  to  throw  open  a  bath  free 
for  one  day,  or  longer.  This  was  sometimes  provided  by  will, 
e.g.,  Agrippa,  Dion.  54.  29. 

T  Becker  is  hardly  justified  in  his  stricture  on  Gell  for  this 
statement.  Besides  Commodns,  Gordian  and  Gallienns  are  said 
to  have  bathed  seven  times  a  day,  and  no  doubt  they  had  imitators 
in  a  humble  position.  Remmius  Palaemon,  in  our  period,  bathed 
"  xccpitts  in  die."     Suet,  de  Gr.  23. 

X  Spart.  Hadr.  22. 


ABUSE  OF  THE  CUSTOM.  235 

thermce  were  filled  with  loungers,  and  the  exedrce 
with  ambitious  declaimers  and  poets,  who  victimised 
the  indolent  bathers  by  reciting  to  them  their 
compositions.  The  moral  effects  of  this  excess 
were,  of  course,  highly  pernicious.  Besides  the 
enervating  effect  of  the  bath  itself,  the  decent 
rules  which  forbade  the  young  to  bathe  with  the 
mature,  and  those  which  prevented  the  two  sexes 
from  bathing  together,  were  relaxed;  till  in  the  latter 
half  of  the  century,  it  was  quite  common  for  men 
and  women  to  make  appointments  to  meet  each 
other  in  the  bath.  It  stands  to  reason  that  this  was 
not  done  by  respectable  women,  but  the  frequent 
mention  of  legislation  on  the  subject  shews  how  diffi- 
cult the  practice  was  to  eradicate.  In  most  cases 
the  women  either  had  separate  rooms,  or  were  ad- 
mitted at  different  times  to  the  men.  Some  bathing 
dress  was  worn  by  the  women,  but  not  by  the  men. 
Besides  the  baths  at  Rome,  the  use  of  mineral 
springs  and  health  resorts  was  known  to  the 
Romans.  Very  few  of  the  places  which  are  now 
frequented  by  invalids  within  the  limits  of  the 
empire  escaped  their  notice.  In  Italy  itself  several 
places  were  visited  for  the  sake  of  their  baths. 
The  chief  seem  to  have  been  Puteoli,  Sinuessa, 


236  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

Linternum,  and  above  all,  Baiae.*  Baiae  became  a 
centre  of  fashionable  life  and  amusement,  which 
was  frequented  both  by  healthy  and  sick,  and  in 
the  absence  of  the  restraints  which  were  still  felt 
in  the  capital,  every  kind  of  indulgence  was  freely 
practised  there,  so  that  Seneca  calls  it  "diver- 
sorium  vitiorum."  The  bath  was  a  very  favourite 
prescription  with  ancient  physicians. 

We  will  conclude  this-  chapter  by  a  short  account 
of  the  games  and  other  amusements  popular  in 
this  period.  The  chief  time  at  which  these  took 
place  was  just  before  the  bath.  We  have  men- 
tioned the  ball -courts  and  galleries  which  sur- 
rounded the  great  thermae.  These  were  filled 
with  players,  anxious  to  take  exercise  before  their 
bath.  The  nature  of  the  games  played  in  the 
sphceristeria  has  never  been  quite  decided,  but  it 
appears  to  have  been  rather  puerile.  Three  kinds 
of  balls  were  used,  which  were  called  respectively 
follis,  paganica,  and  pita  trigonalis,  the  first  being 
the  largest.  The  commonest  game  was  called 
datatbn  ludere,  in  which  the  players  stood  in  a 
circle  and  threw  the  ball  to  one  another  to  catch, 

*  Ischia,  the  modern  substitute  for  Baias,  seems  to  have  been 
little  visited  by  the  ancients. 


GA  MES  A  T  BA  LL.  237 

changing  the  direction  unexpectedly,  in  order  to 
take  the  receiver  unawares.  Plautus,  however, 
mentions  da  tores  and  /adores  as  the  two  parties 
in  a  ball-game.  This  would  suggest  some  game 
more  like  cricket  or  rounders,  but  we  cannot  follow 
up  the  clue.  Another  game  was  called  harpasta, 
which  seems  to  have  been  a  rough  scramble  for 
the  ball.  The  phrase  expulsim  ludere  probably 
refers  to  the  datatim  game.  Another  favourite  ex- 
ercise preparatory  to  the  bath  was  to  fence  with  a 
blunt  sword  against  a  post.  Dumb-bells  were  used 
for  the  same  purpose  of  exercise  before  bathing. 

Field-sports  were  popular  among  some  classes  at 
Rome.  Coursing  was  the  most  common,  the  hare 
being  followed  on  foot,  but  often  snared  in  nets. 
The  wild  boar  was  also  hunted  with  dogs.  Fishing 
was  a  favourite  amusement,  both  with  bait  and 
fly.  The  latter  invention  has  been  denied  to  the 
Romans  by  some  writers,  but  it  is  proved  by 
Martial.* 

A  more  quiet  amusement  was  the  game  oimorra, 
still  played  in  Italy.  One  person  held  up  one  or 
more  fingers  for  a  moment,  and  the  other  had  to 
guess  how  many  he  had  held  up.     Hence  the  pro- 

*  Ep.  5.  18,  6. 


238  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

verb  for  an  honest  man,  "One  with  whom  you 
could  play  morra  in  the  dark." 

Games  of  chance  were  extremely  popular.  The 
chief  was  played  with  the  ordinary  dice  (tesserce) 
and  dicebox  (fritillus),  and  was  generally  a 
vehicle  for  gambling.  When  the  game  was  ir\t«r- 
TofidkivSa,  in  the  Greek  phrase,  sixes  was  the  best 
throw ;  the  more  common  mode  of  reckoning  gave 
the  first  place  to  the  "  Venus,"  where  all  the  dice 
were  different,  and  the  worst  to  the  "  Canis  "  (four 
aces).  Besides  the  dice,  games  were  played  with 
knuckle-bones  {tali),  which  were  only  marked  on 
four  sides.  The  words  "  Venus  "  and  "  Cvnis  "  be- 
long chiefly  to  these,  which  were  more  r)?z&  than 
dice  at  banquets,  in  order  to  decide  who  should  be 
the  arbiter  bibendi.  Dice  were  forbidd*  n  by  law, 
but,  like  other  enactments  of  the  same  kind,  the 
prohibition  was  disregarded. 

Two  or  three  games  are  mentioned  resembling 
our  draughts  or  chess.  One  was  called  "latrun- 
culi,"  in  which  the  object  was  to  take  the  enemy's 
pieces,  and  check-mate  him  (ad  incitas  redigere). 
There  appears  to  be  some  doubt  whether  thy  game 
was  decided  like  chess,  or  whether  thy  player 
who  had  most  pieces   left  at   the  end  was  the 


DICE-PL  AT.  239 

winner.*  Another  game  of  the  same  kind  was 
the  "  duodecim  scripta"  which  appears  to  have 
closely  resembled  backgammon.  It  was  played 
with  white  and  black  pebbles  (calculi),  and  com- 
bined chance  and  skill.  Men  who  could  not  use 
their  advantages  were  likened  to  lucky  but  un- 
skilful dice-players,  who  made  good  throws,  but 
could  not  play  their  pieces  properly.  The  game 
of  "  noughts  and  crosses  "  was  also  played,  "  in  qua 
vicisse  est  continuasse  suos." 

We  need  not  delay  over  children's  games,  which 
are  much  the  same  in  every  age  and  country. 
Hoops,  tops,  nuts,f  and  dolls  were  all  familiar  to 
the  Roman  child,  and  were  sometimes  held  out 
as  inducements  to  learning  by  the  more  gentle 
type  of  schoolmaster.  We  also  hear  of  hide  and 
seek  (icpv7rTu>Sa.  waifav),  forfeits,  "  kiss-in-the-ring," 
and  "  French  and  English." 

*  The  most  probable  explanation  of  the  game  is  that  given  by 
a  writer  in  the  "  Cornhill  Magazine,"  vol.  20.  "  Pieces  were 
taken,"  he  says,  "  not  by  being  exposed  to  attack,  but  by  being 
enclosed  between  two  of  the  adversary's  pieces,  so  that  they  could 
not  be  moved  out  of  check.  When  no  piece  could  be  moved,  the 
player  was  said,  '  ad  incitas  redigi,'  and  lost  the  game."  If  this 
explanation  is  correct,  the  game  must  often  have  resulted  in  a 
"  stale-mate,"  and  in  this  case  perhaps  the  player  who  had  most 
pieces  left  won  the  game.  Becker's  explanation  is  substantially 
the  same. 

•j-  Nuts  were  used  instead  of  marbles. 


(    240    ) 


CHAPTER  X. 

L  U  X  U  E  Y. 

No  feature  in  the  life  of  Rome  at  this  epoch  is 
more  persistently  brought  before  us  than  the  inor- 
dinate development  of  luxury.  It  was  the  feature 
which  most  impressed  the  Romans  themselves,  as 
we  see  by  the  writings  of  every  author  whose 
works  have  come  down  to  us.  Juvenal,  Seneca, 
and  the  elder  Pliny,  the  two  latter  especially,  are 
vehement  in  their  denunciations  of  the  unheard-of 
extravagance  which  had  arisen  in  their  age.  Other 
writers,  whose  principles  did  not  lead  them  to  de- 
plore the  change,  were  fully  alive  to  it.  It  was 
recognized  by  all  as  the  main  characteristic  of  the 
time,  as  a  social  change,  hardly  less  important  than 
the  political  change  which  accompanied  it. 

The  observations  of  contemporaries  are  to  a  great 
extent  borne  out  by  the  facts  as  far  as  we  know 
them.  There  is  no  doubt  that  the  century  which 
followed  the    battle  of  Actium,   comprising  the 


GOETHE  ON  ROMAN  LUXURY.  241 

reigns  of  the  Cesarean  family,  did  witness  the 
highest  point  which  luxury  reached  in  the  Roman 
Empire.  The  subject  of  Roman  luxury  in  general 
thus  belongs  particularly  to  the  period  which  we 
are  considering,  and  deserves  to  be  dealt  with  in  a 
separate  chapter.  It  is  a  very  interesting  subject, 
for  the  luxury  of  a  nation  is  the  measure  of  its 
material  civilisation,  as  its  literature  is  of  its  in- 
tellectual. The  life  of  the  wealthiest  class  supplies 
us  with  most  of  the  materials  which  we  want  for 
comparing  one  civilisation  with  another,  and  we 
commonly  even  estimate  the  prosperity  of  a  nation 
by  the  amount  of  money  which  is  consumed  in 
unproductive  expenditure. 

The  opinion  of  Goethe  on  Roman  civilisation  is 
well  known.  In  more  than  one  place  he  says  that 
the  Romans  always  remained  parvenus,  who  did 
not  know  how  to  spend  their  wealth,  and  that 
their  luxury  was  nothing  but  tasteless  extrava- 
gance and  vulgar  ostentation.  It  will  be  the  chief 
object  of  this  chapter  to  examine  this  view  in 
the  light  of  facts,  and  thus  to  arrive  at  a  just 
estimate  of  both  the  extent  and  character  of 
Roman  luxury. 

Before  entering  into  detail,  one  or  two  general 
Q 


242  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

remarks  must  be  made.  It  has  become  a  common- 
place to  contrast  the  extravagance  and  ostenta- 
tion of  Roman  civilisation  with  its  ignorance  of 
some  of  the  simplest  means  of  comfort.  It  would 
be  a  hasty  view  which  should  condemn  that 
civilisation  as  vulgar  on  this  account.  Our  civili- 
sation is  industrial;  that  of  Rome  was  (to  use 
Herbert  Spencer's  distinction)  militant.  An  in- 
dustrial people  both  values  comfort  more,  and  is 
more  apt  to  devise  means  to  secure  it.  We  in 
England  should  also  remember  that  southern  na- 
tions have  always  cared  less  than  ourselves  for  those 
minor  luxuries  which  make  up  what  we  call  com- 
fort ;  and  that  our  own  ideas  of  what  constitutes 
comfort  have  undergone  a  rapid  change  during  the 
last  century.  The  discovery  of  America,  and  the 
opening  of  the  whole  world  to  trade,  have  con- 
tributed, with  other  causes,  to  raise  our  standard 
of  the  necessaries  of  civilised  life  higher  than 
was  possible  to  the  Romans.  We  must  then  be 
fully  prepared  to  find  a  great  inferiority  in  these 
respects  in  ancient  Rome,  and  to  ascribe  the  defi- 
ciency not  to  the  want  of  proportion  and  "  savoir 
faire"  which  marks  vulgar  prosperity,  but  to  the 
causes  above  mentioned,  which  made  it  impossible 


MA  GNIFICENT  B UILDINGS.  243 

for  civilisation  to   advance  much  further  on  this 
side. 

The  most  imposing  feature  of  Roman  luxury  is 
certainly  the  magnificence  of  the  buildings.  Here, 
if  anywhere,  Rome  may  challenge  modern  Europe 
to  rival  her  splendour.  The  world  will  probably 
never  see  another  Colosseum,  perhaps  never  a 
second  Hadrian's  villa.  It  would,  indeed,  be  a 
childish  error  to  measure  the  triumphs  of  architec- 
ture by  size  alone,  a  criterion  which  would  set  the 
makers  of  the  pyramids  at  Cairo  and  Uxmal,  and 
of  the  Great  Wall  of  China,  above  the  men  who 
built  St.  Peter's  and  Cologne  Cathedral ;  but 
though  the  edifices  of  the  Roman  Empire  never 
equalled  those  of  Egypt  in  size,  nor  Gothic  cathe- 
drals in  design,  nor  the  works  of  modern  engi- 
neers in  practical  utility,  they  probably  exhibit, 
taken  as  a  whole,  a  more  perfect  combination  of 
these  three  qualities  than  the  world  has  seen  at 
any  other  time.  The  public  buildings  in  Rome 
itself  hold  the  first  place.  The  ruins  of  the 
Colosseum  and  of  the  Baths  of  Caracalla,  both 
buildings  raised  for  luxury,  perhaps  impress  the 
modern  inquirer  more  than  any  descriptions  of 
sumptuous  banquets  or  gorgeous  dress.    They  are 

Q2 


244  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

on  a  scale  quite  beyond  any  similar  buildings  now 
existing.  They  imply  a  command  of  labour  and 
material  beyond  the  resources  of  the  richest 
sovereign  or  corporation.  As  the  visitor  tries  to 
restore  in  his  mind's  eye  the  marble  pillars,  the 
statues,  the  profuse  decorations  in  gold,  silver,  and 
costly  stones,  the  fountains,  arcades,  pictures,  and 
libraries,  of  the  thermae,  or  the  magnificence  of  the 
amphitheatre  in  its  original  state,  even  the  majesty 
of  St.  Peter's  seems  to  sink  into  insignificance 
before  these  pleasure-grounds  of  Caesar's  subjects. 
And  all  this  beauty  and  magnificence  was  open  to 
the  poorest  citizen,  either  absolutely  gratis,  or  for 
the  smallest  nominal  sum.  It  is  characteristic  of 
Rome  that  its  noblest  public  buildings  should  be 
places  of  amusement  rather  than  religious  edifices  ; 
these  latter  cannot  compare  with  the  triumphs  of 
mediaeval  architecture,  though  many  will  still 
prefer  the  simple  grandeur  of  the  Pantheon,  shorn 
as  it  is  of  its  gilded  roof  and  marble  statues,  to  the 
tawdrier  decoration  of  later  churches.  The  won- 
derful roads  and  aqueducts  which  justly  excite  our 
admiration  for  the  people  who  produced  them, 
do  not  come  under  the  head  of  luxury ;  but  a 
reference  to  them  here  cannot  be  omitted,  be- 


MANSIONS  OF  THE  NOBLES.  245 

fore    we    leave    the    subject    of    Roman    public 
buildings. 

The  private  houses  of  the  wealthy  nobles  were 
on  a  scale  corresponding  to  the  public  buildings. 
Like  them,  they  date  chiefly  from  the  establish- 
ment of  the  empire.  The  palace  of  Lucullus, 
which,  when  it  was  built,  was  the  finest  house  in 
Rome,  was  in  a  few  years  surpassed  by  not  lees 
than  a  hundred  new  mansions,  which  vied  with 
each  other  in  size  and  splendour.  Here  again  it  is 
probable  that  modern  times  have  failed  to  equal 
the  first  century  of  our  era.  The  town  house  of 
the  English  or  Continental  nobleman  is  not  now 
comparable  to  a  "  small  city,"  however  splendid 
its  interior  may  be.  There  is  not  the  need  to 
accommodate  an  army  of  slaves  under  the  great 
man's  roof,  nor  does  Western  civilisation  affect  the 
spacious  reception  rooms  and  ante-rooms  which 
the  Roman  nobles,  like  some  Oriental  grandees, 
always  provided  for  their  numerous  clients  and 
humble  friends.  On  the  other  hand,  the  private 
apartments  of  the  Roman  were  usually  on  a 
humble  scale.  The  bedrooms  and  private  sitting 
rooms  seem  to  have  been  usually  small  and  simply 
furnished.    The    splendour    and  ostentation   was 


246  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

chiefly  reserved  for  the  atria  and  peristyles,  which 
were  adorned  with  marble  columns,  wall-paintings, 
and  statues,  and  must  have  presented  a  very  im- 
posing appearance.  There  is  something  Oriental 
about  the  whole  arrangement  of  the  Roman  house, 
with  its  open  courts,  its  spacious  halls,  its  prodi- 
gality of  space,  combined  with  very  imperfect 
arrangements  for  privacy  and  comfort.  If  we 
attempt  to  make  for  ourselves  a  plan  of  one  of 
these  mansions  from  the  very  imperfect  and  con- 
tradictory records  which  have  come  to  us,  we  shall 
probably  end  by  echoing  Martial's  criticism  of  one 
of  them. 

"  Atria  longa  patent ;  sed  nee  cenantibus  umquam 
Nee  somno  locus  est ;  quam  bene  non  habitas."* 

The  dining-room  was,  however,  not  usually  for- 
gotten. In  great  houses  there  was  commonly 
more  than  one  triclinium  of  convenient  size  for 
entertainment,  and  these  were  of  course  decorated 
with  great  prodigality.  Besides  sleeping  apart- 
ments, traces  have  been  found  at  Pompeii  of 
ante-rooms  joining  the  bedrooms,  which  might 
serve  either  as  dressing  rooms  or  private  sitting 
rooms.!     In    exceptional    cases    luxury    invaded 

*  Mart.  xii.  50. 

•f  Mentioned  also  by  Pliny  (Ep,  2.  17). 


PARKS  IN  ROME.  247 

these  chambers  also,  and  the  rich  man  provided 
himself  with  different  bedrooms  for  different 
seasons,  sumptuously  fitted  up  with  reference  to 
varying  temperature.  But  this  form  of  luxury  was, 
as  we  have  said,  uncommon.  The  bed-chamber 
was  generally  small  and  simple,  and  the  "  fireside  " 
comforts  neglected,  as  they  always  are  where  the 
climate  permits  and  invites  an  outdoor  life. 

We  have  mentioned  the  wide  area  covered  by 
these  domus.  The  space  was  not  always  entirely 
occupied  by  the  series  of  courts  and  extensive 
offices  which  formed  the  ordinary  ground-plan  of 
the  Roman  house.  The  rich  man  of  the  early  em- 
pire was  sometimes  not  content  unless  he  was  the 
possessor  of  a  perfect  rus  in  urbe*  and  could  sur- 
round his  town-house  not  only  with  trees,  gardens, 
and  shaded  walks,  but  even  with  woods  and  vine- 
yards, shutting  out  all  the  sounds,  and  even  the 
sight  of  the  streets.  These  parks  in  the  city  were, 
of  course,  few  in  number,  and  chiefly  in  the  suburbs, 
or  just  outside  the  town.  Many  of  the  best  houses, 
which  were  built  on  the  Seven  Hills  themselves,  must 
have  had  little  or  no  gardens  except  within  the 
spacious  courts  which  the  mansion  itself  inclosed. 

*  Hart,  12.  57.  21. 


248  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

It  is  not  the  least  of  the  difficulties  which  sur- 
round the  Roman  topographer  to  reconcile  the 
wide  area  occupied  by  these  great  houses  with 
the  comparatively  small  extent  of  the  whole 
city.* 

The  palaces  of  some  of  the  emperors  of  course 
far  surpassed  the.  grandest  private  houses  in  size 
and  magnificence.  To  pass  over  the  more  modest 
buildings  of  the  first  princes,  the  "  Golden  House  " 
of  Nero  seems  to  have  been  in  design,  if  not  in 
completion,  the  most  stupendous  dwelling-place 
ever  built  for  a  mortal  man.  Even  if  we  regard 
the  ancient  descriptions  of  the  size  of  this  palace 
as  greatly  exaggerated, — and  some  of  them  are 
without  doubt  intentionally  so, — it  remains  one  of 
the  largest  royal  houses  ever  built,  and  the  internal 
decorations  seem  to  have  been  incomparably  mag- 
nificent. It  was  surrounded  by  parks,  woods,  and 
pools  of  great  size,  which  seem  to  have  been 

*  The  statement  of  Becker  (Gallus,  p.  280,  English  ed.)  as  to 
the  great  lowness  of  the  Roman  palace  seems  to  require  some 
modification.  Cf.  Mart.  12.  57.  20,  "  Cui  plana  summos  despicit 
domus  montes,"  and  i.  64.  10,  "Celsae  culmina  villa?,"  &c.  If  a 
second  and  third  storey  were  usual,  the  difficulty  of  accounting 
for  the  space  required  is  diminished.  Friedlander,  however,  is 
convinced  that  it  never  had  a  second  storey  in  the  middle,  and 
sometimes  not  even  in  the  winga. 


PALACES  OF  THE  E MP E ROUS.  249 

entirely  within  the  walls.  The  colonnades  of  the 
house  itself  extended  a  Roman  mile  in  length,  and 
crossed  some  of  the  chief  thoroughfares  of  the 
city.  The  cities  of  the  East  were  ransacked  for 
masterpieces  of  Greek  art  for  the  interior.  The 
walls  shone  with  gold  and  pearls,  and  the  roof 
rested  on  marble  columns  of  enormous  size  and 
beauty.  If  we  put  any  faith  in  the  accounts 
which  have  reached  us,  we  must  admit  that  the 
world  then  saw  the  crowning  monument  of  the 
luxury  of  rulers  and  the  servility  of  their  sub- 
jects. 

The  palace  of  Domitian  was  the  next  in  splen- 
dour to  the  Golden  House.  It  was  so  profusely 
adorned  with  the  precious  metal,  that  a  beholder 
might  fancy  the  emperor  possessed  of  the  magic 
touch,  which  converts  everything  to  gold.  Plu- 
tarch and  Statius  give  us  glowing  accounts  of  a 
magnificence  very  similar  to  that  we  have  de- 
scribed in  Nero's  palace. 

The  country  houses  of  the  wealthy  Romans  were 
not  less  magnificent  than  the  town  palaces  which 
we  have  just  described.  Every  part  of  Italy  was 
covered  by  their  parks  and  villas.  The  beautiful 
coast  of  Campania,  the  Sabine  Hills,  the  lakes  of 


250  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

the  north,  and  every  other  attractive  district  in  the 
peninsula,  were  full  of  these  seats.  Most  rich  men 
were  not  content  with  one  villa,  but  bought  several 
in  various  parts  of  the  country,  which  they  visited 
at  different  seasons  of  the  year.  Immense  sums 
were  spent  on  the  purchase  of  estates,  and  still 
greater  on  laying  them  out.  Statius  gives  us  an 
extravagant  account  of  the  extent  to  which  hills 
were  levelled  and  reservoirs  excavated  to  please 
the  fancy  of  the  owner.  Even  the  sea  was 
encroached  upon  by  moles  and  earthworks,  so 
that  in  the  rather  absurd  phrase  of  Horace,  the 
fish  are  cramped  for  room  by  the  diminution  of  the 
ocean.  This  particular  fancy  was  chiefly  indulged 
in  the  Bay  of  Naples,  where  the  fashionable  world 
carried  on  many  of  its  amusements  on  the  water. 
The  ground  about  the  house  was  laid  out  in  an 
elaborate  and  rather  too  artificial  manner,  the  trees 
being  frequently  cut  into  fantastic  shapes,  and 
planted  in  straight  rows  or  patterns,  while  the 
flowers  were  also  arranged  with  great  care.  We 
need  not  doubt,  however,  that  the  Romans  shewed 
good  taste  in  the  arrangement  of  their  gardens  as 
well  as  in  their  choice  of  situations.  The  descrip- 
tions of  Pliny  and    Statius,   who   are  our    chief 


CO  UNTR  Y  HO  USES.  25  1 

authorities,  shew  that  these  writers  had  a  keen 
appreciation  of  the  simple  beauties  of  nature. 
Pliny  has  given  us  a  description  of  two  of  his  villas, 
the  Tuscan  and  the  Laurentine,  the  account  of  the 
latter  being  admirably  clear.  The  discovery  of  a 
suburban  villa  at  Pompeii  has  thrown  much  light 
on  his  remarks  and  on  certain  obscure  points  in 
the  construction  of  the  villas.  These  and  other 
minor  sources  of  information  are  open  to  us,  but 
no  one  has  yet  succeeded  in  drawing  a  satisfactory 
plan  of  one  these  immense  houses,  which  must  have 
resembled  a  small  village  or  a  public  institution 
rather  than  a  single  residence.  We  hear  of  rooms 
for  every  part  of  the  day  and  each  season  of  the 
year,  of  long  corridors  and  verandahs  connecting 
the  detached  portions  of  the  house,  of  baths  and 
tennis-courts,  besides  all  the  necessary  out-houses 
and  offices,  very  extensive  in  an  establishment  of 
slaves.  Symmetry  and  compactness  appear  not  to 
have  been  studied  by  the  Roman  architect,  and  the 
descriptions  we  have  mentioned,  though  giving  us 
a  clear  idea  of  each  part,  baffle  our  attempts  at 
arrangement.  With  regard  to  internal  decoration, 
it  is  interesting  to  contrast  the  comparative  sim- 
plicity of  Pliny's  villa  with  the  luxury  and  osten- 


252  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

tation  displayed  in  that  of  Manlius  Vopiscus,  the 
subject  of  Statius'  Eulogy.*  The  former  was  adorned 
only  with  the  cheaper  kinds  of  marble,  and  com- 
mon pictures  and  statuary ;  the  latter  blazed  with 
gilded  beams  supported  by  pillars  of  African  marble, 
and  contained  statues  in  silver  and  in  bronze  from 
the  hand  of  Myron.  Ivory  and  jewels  were  mingled 
with  the  precious  metals  in  many  a  curiously 
wrought  ornament,  and  streams  of  pure  water 
coursed  through  every  room,  diffusing  a  grateful 
murmur  and  pleasant  coolness.  Apparently  as 
much  care  was  taken  in  the  decoration  of  a 
favourite  villa  as  in  that  of  a  house  at  Rome.  The 
comparative  simplicity  of  Pliny's  was  owing  to  his 
limited  fortune.  We  may  suppose,  however,  that 
when  a  rich  man  possessed  five  or  six  villas,  as  was 
often  the  case,  he  confined  himself  to  decorating 
one  or  two  only  in  the  splendid  manner  above 
described.  Very  likely  works  of  art  and  orna- 
ments were  carried  by  the  owner  from  one  house 
to  another. 
An  interesting  comparison  has  been  made  be- 

*  Stat.  Silv.  1.  8.  Cf.  also  2.  2,  where  he  describes  the  Surren- 
tine  villa  of  Pollius  Felix.  The  same  magnificence  of  internal 
decoration  is  described,  and  the  baths,  temples,  and  porticoes 
close  to  the  Bay  are  praised  with  great  beauty. 


A  COMPARISON  WITH  ENGLAND.         253 

tween  the  villas  of  the  early  Roman  empire  and 
the  country  houses  of  the  nobility  in  this  country. 
The  conclusion  come  to  is  that  the  Romans  far 
surpassed  us  in  the  profusion  of  costly  materials 
used  in  internal  decoration,  while  in  size  the  Roman 
villa  probably  sometimes  exceeded  the  largest  of 
English  castles.  On  the  former  of  these  points 
there  can  be  no  doubt.  Never,  perhaps,  except  in 
the  palaces  of  the  Incas,  has  gold  been  so  freely 
used  in  the  decoration  of  walls  and  ceilings  as  at 
Rome;  never,  certainly,  have  marbles  and  ivory 
been  so  lavishly  employed.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  parks  and  gardens  of  the  Romans  seem  never 
to  have  equalled  those  of  modern  England.  Partly 
from  want  of  appreciation  of  open  park-land,  partly 
from  paucity  of  shrubs  and  flowers,  neither  park 
nor  garden  was  in  keeping  with  the  splendour 
within.  The  flowers  were  of  simple  kinds,  and 
lacked  variety,  but  they  were  grown  in  large 
quantities,  for  the  graceful  custom  of  wearing 
garlands,  and  even  the  rites  of  religion,  made  a 
constant  and  plentiful  supply  necessary.  Roses, 
lilies,  and  violets,  were  the  only  flowers  cultivated 
on  a  large  scale.  Greenhouses  and  hothouses  for 
flowers  and  fruit  were  first  introduced  in  our  period, 


254  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

and  of  course  were  soon  very  common.  Winter 
grapes  and  melons  were  grown  under  glass,  and  we 
hear  of  forced*  roses  and  lilies.  Fruit  trees  were 
planted  sometimes  among  the  other  trees,  some- 
times in  orchards.  The  Romans  were  well  supplied 
with  fruit.  They  had  several  kinds  of  apples,  no  less 
than  thirty  sorts  of  pears ;  plums,  peaches,  pome- 
granates, cherries,  figs,  quinces,  nuts,  chestnuts, 
medlars,  mulberries,  almonds,  and  strawberries. 
Their  ornamental  trees  were  few  in  number,  and 
this  doubtless  led  to  the  artificial  shaping  before 
alluded  to,  which  was  carried  to  absurd  lengths  at 
the  close  of  the  first  century.  The  garden  was 
always  intersected  by  a  path  which  could  be  used 
for  riding,  walking,  or  taking  the  air  in  a  litter. 
Porticoes  for  lounging  in  the  open  air,  and  elaborate 
baths,  were  comforts  not  likely  to  be  forgotten  in 
Italy. 

We  naturally  pass  from  the  architecture  and  de- 
coration of  the  Roman  house  to  its  furniture.  It 
is  necessary  here  to  repeat  the  warning  given  before 
against  too  hasty  generalisation  from  a  few  in- 
stances of  great  extravagance.  Fancy  prices  are  a 
feature  of  every  advanced  civilisation.    At  Rome 

*  "  Festinatoe,"  Mart.  13.  127.  See  also  on  this  subject,  Mart, 
8.  14  ;  4.  21.  5. 


COSTLY  FURNITURE.  255 

they  never  reached  such  a  pitch  as  in  modern 
England,  where  three  thousand  pounds  have  been 
given  for  a  scarce  old  volume,  but  they  were 
quite  out  of  proportion  to  the  ordinary  scale  of 
value.  The  chief  crazes  were  for  ornaments  in 
silver  plate  executed  by  famous  artists,  for  tables 
of  the  African  wood  called  citrus,  and  for  vases 
and  other  vessels  of  murra,  which  has  been 
identified  with  porcelain,  but  is  probably  fluor* 
spar.  Corinthian  bronzes  were  also  bought  at  im- 
mense prices.  As  instances  of  the  sums  given  for 
these  articles,  we  hear  that  Nero  paid  a  million 
sesterces  for  a  cup  of  murra,  and  even  Cicero  the 
same  sum  for  a  citrus  table.  It  was  common  to 
make  large  collections  of  these  favourite  orna- 
ments, especially  of  citrus  tables,  which  were  ad- 
mired for  their  beautiful  grain,  resembling  a  tiger's 
or  panther's  skin,  or  a  peacock's  tail.  Seneca  pos- 
sessed no  fewer  than  500  of  these  tables ! 

Men  who  did  not  care  to  be  in  the  fashion  might 
of  course  furnish  their  houses  luxuriously  at  far 
lower  prices  than  the  examples  just  given  might 
seem  to  imply.  Imitations  of  all  kinds,  such  as 
common  tables  veneered  with  citrus,  and  silver 
vessels  falsely  fathered  on  some  old  master,  were 


rrU-U, 


256  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

as  common  as  similar  work  in  modern  times  ;  and 
even  genuine  ornaments  which  did  not  happen  to 
be  in  fashion  were  much  less  expensive.  Still  I 
think  Friedlander  goes  too  far  when  he  says  that 
a  million  sesterces  was  "  enough  to  furnish  luxu- 
riously a, house,  perhaps  a  palace."  He  bases  the 
statement  entirely  on  a  passage  in  Martial  (3.  62), 
where  this  sum  is  given  as  the  cost  of  the  furniture 
of  an  extravagant  man,  who  boasted  that  he  had 
the  best  of  everything.  Martial,  however,  saj^s 
nothing  about  a  large  house,  and  tells  us  expressly 
that  the  amount  of  furniture  was  small  {no n 
spatiosa  stipe  Ilex).  It  seems  a  mistake  therefore 
to  infer  from  this  that  ordinary  furniture  was  "very 
moderate "  in  price  at  Rome.  As  an  instance  to 
the  contrary,  Pliny  (Nat.  Hist.  36.  24)  says  that 
when  the  house  of  Scaurus  was  burnt  down  by  his 
slaves,  he  lost  in  the  fire  no  less  than  a  hundred 
million  sesterces.  Scaurus  was  a  millionaire  and 
excessively  prodigal;  still,  so  large  a  sum  could 
hardly  have  been  spent  on  a  house  unless  materials 
and  workmanship  were  dear. 

Some  of  these  costly  articles  of  luxury  were 
exceedingly  beautiful ;  others  were  certainly  in  bad 
taste.   The  Corinthian  bronzes  and  the  silver  work 


ART  DECORA  TION.  257 

by  Greek  masters  were  of  exquisite  workmanship, 
superior  without  doubt  in  design  and  execution  to 
anything  now  produced.  The  same  superiority 
has  been  claimed  for  the  work  in  glass  and  crystal, 
the  colouring  of  which  was  an  art  thoroughly 
understood  by  the  Romans.  The  remains  of  their 
glass-ware  that  have  been  dug  up,  faded  and  broken 
as  they  mostly  are,  testify  to  a  very  high  degree 
of  excellence.  On  the  other  hand,  gilt  and  silver 
legs  to  the  beds,  and  purple  coverlets  embroidered 
with  pictures,  seem  to  our  taste  rather  barbaric. 
Pillows  covered  with  silk,  and  mattresses  stuffed 
with  eider-down,  reveal  the  effeminacy  of  the 
age. 

These  luxuries  were  of  course  confined  to  a  few. 
Wealth  was  probably  more  diffused  in  the  middle 
of  the  first  century  than  at  the  close  of  the  re- 
public, but  owing  to  its  unproductive  expenditure 
it  failed  at  all  times  to  call  into  being  a  well-to-do 
middle  class.  Plate  was  owned  by  a  fairly  large 
number  of  persons,  and  seems  to  have  been  valued 
as  a  mark  of  respectability,  but  the  other  extrava- 
gances we  have  mentioned  were  only  to  be  found 
in  the  palaces  and  villas  of  the  rich,  who  formed 
a  very  small  fraction  of  the  population,  even  at 

R 


258  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

Rome,  and  were  rarely  to  be  found  at  all  in  any- 
provincial  town. 

Next  to  the  dwelling  and  its  furniture,  the  chief 
instrument  of  human  vanity  is  dress.  In  this 
respect  the  Romans  compare  favourably  with 
modern  Europe.  The  simplicity  of  primitive  cos- 
tume was  never  displaced  by  the  growth  of  luxury ; 
and  in  spite  of  the  costliness  of  some  of  the 
materials,  it  was  almost  impossible  for  a  Roman  to 
ruin  himself,  as  many  have  done  in  modern  times, 
in  this  most  foolish  form  of  extravagance. 

The  original  national  dress  of  the  Romans  was 
the  toga,  a  woollen  garment  of  circular  shape, 
which  was  folded  round  the  body  in  a  peculiar 
manner.  At  first  the  toga  was  the  only  garment 
worn  by  either  sex,  but  long  before  the  end  of  the 
republic  it  had  ceased  to  be  worn  by  respectable 
women,  and  men  wore  the  tunica  underneath  it. 
It  remained  always  the  distinctive  dress  of  the 
Roman  citizen,  and  its  use  was  forbidden  even  to 
exiles  and  persons  who  had  lost  their  civic  rights. 
Its  awkward  shape,  however,  made  it  unsuitable 
either  for  work  or  amusement,  and  the  custom  of 
discarding  it,  except  on  certain  occasions,  was 
generally  adopted.     In  the  house  the  tunic  was 


DRESS  OF  THE  MEN.  259 

generally  worn  alone ;  out  of  doors  it  was  supple- 
mented with  a  pamula  or  lacerna,  the  former  of 
which  was  often  worn  over  the  toga,  for  warmth. 
Augustus  tried  to  restore  the  use  of  the  toga,  but  the 
love  of  comfort  was  too  strong  for  him,  and  except 
at  public  games  or  ceremonies,  and  at  court,  it  was 
not  much  worn.  The  tunic  was  a  white  woollen 
shirt,  with  purple  stripes,  these  latter  being  by  law 
a  badge  of  rank,  but  frequently  worn  with  a  slight 
difference  by  others.  Long  sleeves  and  a  long 
skirt  to  the  tunic  were  considered  effeminate  and 
disreputable.  Bright  colours  were  popular  at 
Rome,  and  lacerncE  of  scarlet  or  purple  were  com- 
monly thrown  over  the  shoulder  in  the  streets, 
more  for  show  than  warmth.  The  toga  was  also 
sometimes  d}red,  but  the  coveted  Tyrian  purple 
was  reserved  for  the  emperor.  It  was  the  use  of 
this  dye  that  constituted  a  large  part  of  Roman 
luxury  in  dress.  There  were  several  qualities  in  use, 
the  best  being  exceedingly  costly.  A  mantle  dyed 
with  true  Tyrian  purple  cost,  it  seems,  about  10,000 
sesterces.  The  inferior  kinds  of  purple,  and  other 
colours,  such  as  scarlet,  blue,  or  green,  were 
cheaper,  but  the  cost  of  dyeing  seems  to  have  been 
always  considerable.    The  material,  however,  sel- 


260  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

dom  cost  much,  for  the  use  of  wool  for  the  ordi- 
nary garments  was  universal.  Linen  and  cotton 
were  manufactured,  and  pages  were  sometimes 
dressed  in  linen  tunics,  but  it  was  not  till  the  later 
empire  that  linen  became  a  regular  material  of 
dress.  The  introduction  of  silk  was  a  new  luxury 
in  our  period.  It  was  brought  from  India,  China, 
and  other  Eastern  countries,  and  was  worth  its 
weight  in  gold.  Garments  woven  of  this  material 
were  almost  transparent,  and  were  therefore  justly 
reprobated  as  indecent  and  unbecoming.  Their 
use  by  men  was  forbidden  by  law.  In  our  period 
stuff  of  pure  silk  was  unknown,  linen  and  cotton 
being  mixed  with  it.  Gold  or  silver  tissue,  though 
known,  was  little  used. 

The  dress  of  the  wealthy  Roman  was  therefore 
simple  in  form,  and  homely  in  material.  Only  in 
colour  does  luxury  assert  itself.  Some  extrava- 
gance was  shewn  in  frequent  changes  of  clothes, 
especially  of  the  dinner  suit,  called  synthesis.  A 
vulgar  rich  man  sometimes  changed  this  several 
times  in  the  course  of  a  banquet,  nominally  for 
the  sake  of  coolness,  but  really  for  ostentation. 
But  this  form  of  extravagance  was  not  carried 
nearly  so  far  as  in  the  middle  ages  and  modern 


DRESS  OF  THE  WOMEN.  261 

times.  Nor  do  we  find,  as  we  might  expect, 
trousers  introduced  at  Rome.  Delicate  or  effemi- 
nate persons  wrapped  their  legs  in  bandages  for 
warmth,  but  braccce  were  scouted  as  the  most  dis- 
tinctive mark  of  barbarism,  just  as  their  absence 
is  among  ourselves.  Felt  hats  of  the  simplest  kind 
were  the  only  coverings  for  the  head,  unless  the 
wearer  preferred  to  hide  his  face  under  a  hood. 

Hitherto  we  have  spoken  only  of  the  men's  dress. 
The  women  wore  a  tunic  like  that  of  the  men, 
over  which  was  a  long  robe  reaching  to  the  feet, 
with  a  flounce  sewn  on  beneath.  The  same 
simple  material  was  used  throughout,  but  bright 
colours  were  usually  worn  in  our  period,  perhaps 
almost  displacing  the  old  white  stola.  Purple 
seems  to  have  been  worn,  but  not  of  the  imperial 
hue,  and  we  hear  of  several  other  colours,  such  as 
green,  light  blue,  cherry-colour,  and  violet.  Pat- 
terns in  colours  were  introduced  about  this  time, 
and  greatly  admired.  The  process  of  "  watering  " 
fabrics  seems  to  be  alluded  to  by  Pliny  (Hist.  Nat. 
8.  48.  74.)  In  gold  and  jewellery  more  extrava- 
gance was  displayed.  These  ornaments  were 
of  the  usual  kind,  earrings,  necklaces,  rings,  arm- 
lets, &c,   and  were  often  executed    with  great 

s 


262  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

taste.  A  beautiful  necklace  was  found  at  Pompeii, 
consisting  of  a  gold  twine  supporting  seventy-one 
pendants,  and  set  with  rubies  at  the  clasp.  Pearls 
were  much  valued,  and  very  costly.  One  which 
Julius  Caesar  gave  to  Servilia  cost  him  six  millions 
of  sesterces.  Diamonds  were  rare.  The  chief 
one  we  know  of  is  mentioned  by  Juvenal  as  the 
property  of  Berenice,  sister  of  Herod  of  Judaea. 
This  was  worn  on  a  ring ;  but  Juvenal  says  in 
another  place  that  it  was  fashionable  to  use  the 
best  jewels  in  drinking  cups,  a  custom  which  caused 
the  owner  some  anxiety  at  dinner  if  he  could  not 
trust  his  guests.  We  have  already  mentioned  the 
strange  and  rather  barbaric  use  of  pearls  and  pre- 
cious stones  in  adorning  the  walls  and  ceiling  of 
rooms.  In  Nero's  palace  there  were  private 
chambers  almost  covered  with  pearls.  We  hear 
also  of  jewels  being  worn  on  the  shoes,  and  in  the 
hair,  probably  attached  to  pins. 

It  remains  to  speak  of  the  lowest  form  in  which 
luxury  shows  itself — the  pleasures  of  the  table. 
We  have  learnt  to  associate  ideas  of  excessive 
gluttony  with  the  early  empire,  and  to  regard  that 
period  as  the  acme  of  this  brutish  vice.  A  candid 
investigation  will  reduce  this  censure  within  juster 


LUXURY  IN  FOOD.  263 

limits.  It  may  seem  a  poor  form  of  apology  to 
compare  Roman  greediness  with  the  excesses  of 
modern  society,  and  cap  the  cena  of  Trimalchio 
with  the  menu  of  a  Lord  Mayor's  banquet ;  it 
will  be  more  to  the  purpose  to  shew  that  such 
enormities  were  confined  to  a  small  class  during  a 
short  period,  and  that  while  the  majority  always 
fared  simply,  even  the  world  of  fashion  was 
capable  of  repentance  and  self-reform. 

The  Romans  of  the  republic — before  the  great 
conquests  had  corrupted  ancient  simplicity — lived 
with  an  almost  ascetic  frugality.  The  national 
dish  was  a  mess  of  porridge  {puis),  and  the  generic 
name  of  pulmentarium  served  for  anything  that 
was  added  to  it  as  a  relish.  When  a  cook  was 
employed,  he  was  the  cheapest  and  most  worth- 
less of  slaves.  Drunkenness  was  rare,  and  wine, 
when  drunk,  was  diluted  with  water.  These 
simple  habits  began  to  be  superseded  after  the 
Asiatic  conquests  which  followed  the  second  Punic 
war.  A  vigorous  stand  was  made  by  moralists 
and  patriots  of  the  old  school  against  the  growth 
of  this  extravagance,  but  neither  precept  nor  legis- 
lation availed  to  check  the  advancing  tide.  Italy, 
which   had  formerly  easily  supported  its  thrifty 

S  2 


264  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

population,  became  the  importer  of  delicacies  from 
every  quarter  of  the  known  world.  Each  new 
conquest  added  fresh  luxuries  to  the  gourmand's 
table,  and  gastronomy  soon  began  to  take  rank 
as  a  science.  It  would  be  tedious  and  unnecessary 
to  trace,  in  detail,  the  progress  of  the  culinary  art. 
It  reached  its  acme  in  the  first  century  of  the 
empire,  and  declined  after  the  accession  of  Ves- 
pasian. The  period  between  the  battle  of  Actium 
and  the  death  of  Nero  witnessed  the  greatest 
excesses  which  it  produced,  some  of  which,  from 
their  unequalled  displays  of  gluttony,  have  led 
historians  to  exaggerate  the  extent  of  the  vice  in 
general.  We  should  do  the  Romans  great  in- 
justice if  we  were  to  regard  the  orgies  of  Vitellius 
as  characteristic  of  his  countrymen.  They  were 
the  excesses  of  a  miserable  debauchee  unex- 
pectedly thrust  into  supreme  power,  and  are  never 
recorded  by  Roman  writers  except  with  horror 
and  disgust.  It  was  not  the  custom  of  Roman 
officials  to  employ  the  legionaries  in  hunting  for 
rare  animals  and  birds  for  the  table,  though  the 
gourmand  seldom  failed  to  profit  by  each  new 
acquisition  of  territory.  The  stories  told  of 
Vitellius  are  not  merely  unusual  but  unparallelled, 


TEE  DINNER.  205 


unless  it  be  in  the  lite  of  his  imitator,  Heliogabalus. 
Putting  these  aside,  therefore,  and  taking  the  ordi- 
nary habits  of  the  upper  class  as  our  standard,  let 
us  consider  whether  we  are  justified  in  regarding 
gluttony  as  a  vice  peculiarly  characteristic  ot 
Roman  civilisation.  The  question  will  be  best 
answered  by  a  brief  survey  of  the  meals  which 
formed  part  of  the  ordinary  day  among  the 
wealthy. 

Soon  after  rising,  a  light  breakfast,  called  jenta- 
culum,  consisting  of  bread,  grapes,  &c,  was  taken. 
Then  followed  a  late  dejeuner,  or  early  lunch,  at 
which  meat,  fish,  eggs,  &c.  were  placed  on  the 
table.  The  dinner  (cena)  began  as  early  as  three 
o'clock  in  the  afternoon,  and  consisted  of  several 
courses.  Eggs,  shellfish  of  various  kinds,  fish,  birds 
and  vegetables,  wild-boar  and  other  joints,  hare, 
capons,  and  fancy  dishes  of  many  kinds,  were  com- 
monly served  up.*  The  meal  was  protracted  for 
several  hours.  Pliny  the  Elder,  a  man  noted  for 
abstemious  and  laborious  habits,  rose  from  dinner 
"  before  dark  in  summer,  and  soon  after  nightfall  in 
winter."   This  left  at  least  three  hours  for  the  meal, 

*  See  Macrob.  2.  9,  for  the  menu  of  a  pontifical  banquet.  The 
feasts  given  by  the  priestly  colleges  seem  to  have  been  very 
splendid,  sometimes  forming  epochs  in  the  study  of  gastronomy. 


266  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

if  it  began  at  the  usual  time,  and  men  of  fashion 
gave  much  more  time  to  it.  Sometimes  a  banquet 
was  protracted  even  till  the  morning  light, 
although  it  had  begun  before  the  usual  hour. 

It  is  obvious  that  we  have  here  the  habits  of  a 
thoroughly  idle  as  well  as  wealthy  and  luxurious 
aristocracy.  Business  was  over  so  early  in  the 
day  that  the  whole  afternoon  and  evening  could  be 
given  up  to  amusement.  An  invitation  to  dinner 
was  supposed  to  include  the  whole  day  from  three 
or  thereabouts  till  late  at  night.  And  this  inor- 
dinate space  of  time  seems  really  to  have  been  spent, 
if  not  in  actual  eating  and  drinking,  yet  generally  in 
reclining  at  table.  When  we  remember  that  a 
fairly  substantial  meal,  the  prandium,  had  shortly 
preceded  the  dinner,  we  must  admit  that  the  amount 
of  food  consumed  seems  to  be  excessive.  And 
this  is  confirmed  by  Seneca  and  other  writers. 
Seneca  in  a  striking  passage  (Cons,  ad  Helv.  9), 
declaims  against  the  gluttony  that  collects  from 
Parthia  and  the  Phasis  delicacies  which  it  disdains 
to  digest — "  Edunt  ut  vomant,  vomunt  ut  edant. 
The  coarse  practice  here  referred  to  cannot  be  ex- 
cused as  a  common  hygienic  precaution  ;  for  though 
it  doubtless  averted  to  some  extent  the  consequences 


EXTRA  VA  GA NCE  A ND  OSTENTA  TION.      2G7 

of  excess,  it  could  never  have  been  recommended  or 
practised  after  a  moderate  repast.  If,  as  seems  cer- 
tain, the  Romans  employed  it  habitually,  we  can 
only  conclude  that  they  habitually  ate  more  than 
was  necessary  or  wholesome. 

To  turn  from  the  quantity  to  the  quality  of  the 
food  consumed,  we  are  less  struck  by  the  variety 
and  costliness  of  the  viands  than  by  the  vulgar 
ostentation  which  shewed  itself  in  providing 
them.  Dishes  had  a  fictitious  value  through  their 
rarity.  Thus  a  mullet  which  when  of  the  ordinary 
size  was  cheap,  commanded  sometimes  as  much  as 
6,000  sesterces  when  it  attained  an  unusual  weight. 
Wild  boars  were  served  up  whole.  Peacocks, 
though  not  of  very  good  flavour,  were  placed  on 
the  table  with  their  tails  spread.  Dishes  com- 
posed of  the  livers  or  brains  alone  of  some  bird  or 
animal,  were  much  prized,  chiefly  on  account  of 
their  extravagant  costliness.  A  banquet  was  not  a 
success  unless  it  was  the  talk  ot  the  town.  The 
greater  the  waste,  the  more  absurd  the  extravagance 
of  the  feast,  the  more  certain  was  the  giver  to  win 
the  notoriety  he  coveted.  Expense  was  so  far 
from  being  avoided,  that  it  was  an  object  in  itself. 
Hence  some  of  the  wildest  stories  of  extravagance 


268  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

must  be  set  down,  not  to  gluttony,  but  to  the 
slightly  less  degraded  passion  for  ostentation. 
This  vulgar  craze  was  shown  not  less  in  the  acces- 
sories of  the  banquet.  Tricks  and  surprises, 
devised  by  the  ingenuity  of  the  cook,  had  the  same 
object.  Pantomimes,  rope  dancers,  even  gladiators 
were  introduced  between  the  courses.  Flowers 
and  ornaments  of  all  kinds  were  employed  with 
great  profusion.  The  attendants  and  cupbearers 
were  slaves  chosen  for  their  beauty,  and  bought  at 
immense  prices.  In  a  word,  nothing  was  omitted 
which  could  gain  for  the  host  a  name  for  reckless 
prodigality. 

It  would  be  easy  to  collect  instances  from 
modern  Europe  of  gluttony  and  extravagance 
seemingly  greater  than  we  hear  of  at  Rome.  The 
variety  of  dishes  at  a  modern  banquet  is  much 
greater,  the  cost  may  be  more,  than  in  the  early 
empire.  But  it  is  a  mistake  to  argue  from  such 
instances  that  the  luxury  of  the  table  is  really 
greater  now  than  then.  Such  a  theory  will  not 
bear  examination.  Modern  banquets,  however 
much  they  may  pass  the  limits  of  justifiable  indul- 
gence, do  not  occupy  half  the  entire  day,  and  the 
triumphs  of  the  kitchen  are  not  an  approved  sub- 


EXTENT  OF  THE  EVIL.  2G9 

ject  of  conversation  in  ordinary  society.  If  we 
have  gone  further  in  ordinary  discoveries,  the 
Roman  gourmand  was  inferior  only  through  cir- 
cumstances, not  from  taste  or  moderation.  So  far 
as  we  can  see,  after  making  all  deductions  for 
exaggeration  and  peculiar  cases,  the  wealthiest 
class  at  Rome  must  bear  the  reproach  of  excessive 
addiction  to  the  pleasures  of  the  table,  and  of 
coarse  vulgarity  in  the  pursuit  of  them. 

The  extenuating  circumstances  must  be  sought 
elsewhere.  In  the  first  place,  the  number  of 
persons  able  to  give  first-rate  banquets  was  neces- 
sarily very  small ;  and  outside  this  narrow  circle 
it  appears  that  the  old  frugal  habits  had  not 
entirely  disappeared.  In  the  provincial  towns, 
and  among  the  middle  and  lower  classes  in  the 
capital,  men  were  content  with  the  modest  fare 
which  is  most  suited  to  the  climate  of  Italy.  Meat 
was  eaten  sparingly,  and  the  staple  diet  consisted 
of  grain,  fruit,  and  eggs.  The  second  vindication 
of  the  Roman  character  on  this  head  is  to  be  found 
in  the  fact  that  it  was  still  capable  of  self-reform. 
The  example  and  precepts  of  a  frugal  emperor  only 
brought  to  light  a  change  in  public  opinion  which 
was  ready  to  shew  itself.     Many  causes  had  com- 


270  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

bined  to  produce  a  feeling  of  satiety  and  disgust 
at  the  manner  of  life  which  society  had  been 
leading.  Men  were  anxious  to  rise  above  the 
coarse  animalism  ot  the  last  fifty  years,  and  a 
sumptuary  reform  seemed  the  first  and  most 
obvious  step.  Another  cause  was  at  work  in  the 
diminution  of  wealth,  which  was  now  perceptible. 
The  policy  of  the  empire  had  closed  some  of  the 
avenues  of  fortune,  and  the  privileged  class,  which 
had  so  long  lived  and  rioted  on  the  capital  of 
the  world,  began  to  find  that  their  mine  was 
not  inexhaustible.  Accordingly  a  decided,  though 
gradual,  movement  in  the  direction  of  simplicity 
began  after  the  accession  of  Vespasian.  Extrava- 
gance ceased  to  be  fashionable.  Many  curtailed 
the  expenses  of  their  table  from  principle,  after 
the  manner  of  the  Stoic  philosophy ;  others  sought 
to  please  their  guests  rather  by  the  good  taste  and 
appropriateness  of  the  repast  than  by  its  profusion 
or  expense.  Counter  reactions  indeed  took  place 
before  the  end  of  the  century,  but  never  produced 
so  much  excess  as  had  been  witnessed  in  its 
earlier  part. 

We  have  now  considered  Roman  luxury  in  its 
most  important  aspects,  as  they  appeared  in  the  first 


SUMMARY.  271 


century  of  our  era.  The  most  important  omission 
is  that  of  slavery,  which  was  of  course  the  greatest 
instrument  of  luxury,  and  gave  a  character  to  all 
the  rest.  The  subject  has,  however,  been  treated 
of  in  a  former  chapter,  and  it  must  be  sufficient 
here  to  refer  to  what  was  there  said  of  the  use  of 
slaves  for  purposes  of  luxury.  We  should  now 
be  able  to  form  some  generalisations  from  the  facts 
stated  in  this  chapter,  and  to  estimate  the  char- 
acter and  extent  of  Roman  luxury  at  this  period. 
From  the  material  point  of  view  we  have  said  that 
in  magnificent  buildings,  both  public  and  private, 
later  centuries  have  failed  to  outstrip  the  earlier 
empire.  In  internal  decoration  we  mentioned  the 
extraordinary  profusion  of  rare  marbles  and  pre- 
cious metals,  and  the  passion  for  certain  favourite 
articles  of  furniture  or  ornament.  We  drew  atten- 
tion to  the  semi-Oriental  character  of  the  house 
arrangement,  and  the  sacrifice  of  comfort  to  osten- 
tation which  seems  to  characterise  it.  Passing  to 
dress,  we  admired  the  comparative  simplicity  of 
attire  which  we  find  at  Rome,  and  noticed  especially 
the  universal  use  of  the  commonest  materials. 
Lastly,  we  deplored  the  coarse  luxury  of  the  table, 
and  on    comparing    the    first    century  with   the 


272  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

nineteenth,  decided  that  though  the  apparatus  of 
gluttony  was  less,  the  tendency  to  excess  and 
over-indulgence  was  greater  than  it  has  ever  been 
since.  From  the  social  point  of  view,  we  have 
said  that  luxury,  in  most  of  its  forms,  was  con- 
fined to  a  small  class  in  the  capital.  This  is  true, 
but,  notwithstanding,  there  is  a  decidedly  demo- 
cratic side  to  Roman  luxury.  Its  most  splendid 
monuments,  the  baths  and  amphitheatre,  were 
built  for  the  delectation  of  the  masses.  Its  grandest 
public  works,  its  roads  and  aqueducts,  were  works 
of  universal  utility.  If,  in  one  sense,  it  was  re- 
stricted to  a  smaller  number  than  in  modern 
societies,  in  another  it  was  more  accessible  to 
every  one  than  has  often  been  the  case  since. 
We  must  not  lose  sight  of  this  good  side  of  the 
subject,  for  it  is  both  significant  in  itself,  and  a  use- 
ful corrective  of  the  indiscriminate  censure  which 
has  sometimes  been  heaped  upon  pagan  civilisa- 
tion. Self-indulgence  and  extravagance  shewed  a 
more  unblushing  front  before  the  rise  of  Christianity; 
but  it  is  doubtful  whether  religion  is  any  real 
check  to  the  luxury  of  our  great  capitals.  The 
main  features  are  the  same  as  those  of  Roman 
civilisation,  the  chief  difference  being  in  the  indus- 


CHARACTER  OF  ROMAN  LUXURY.        273 

trial  type  stamped  upon  our  society  as  opposed  to 
the  semi-Oriental  character  of  the  Roman.  Our 
luxury  is  the  product  of  national  labour,  the 
spending  of  wealth  created  from  year  to  year  by 
the  industry  of  the  people  ;  that  of  Rome  was  the 
luxury  of  a  dominant  caste,  which  found  itself 
almost  suddenly  in  command  of  the  resources 
of  three  continents,  resources  which  it  used 
unscrupulously  for  its  own  benefit,  without 
attempting  to  restore  the  waste.  It  is  true  that  a 
luxurious  class  is  alway  unproductive,  but  the 
complete  severance  of  that  class  at  Rome  from  the 
producers  had  a  strong  influence  on  its  character, 
and  caused  those  vulgarisms  of  extravagance  which 
give  colour  to  Goethe's  criticism  quoted  above. 
On  the  whole,  however,  we  think  that  the  German 
poet's  censure  goes  too  far,  and  that  we  are  not 
justified  in  passing  a  sweeping  condemnation  on 
the  luxury  of  the  first  century  of  our  era,  on  the 
ground  either  of  excess  or  of  bad  taste. 


274  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 


COtfCLUSIOK. 

We  have  now  completed  our  sketch  of  Roman 
society  in  the  first  century.  The  magnitude  of  the 
subject  has  compelled  us  to  treat  each  part  of  it 
in  a  cursory  manner,  but  it  is  hoped  that  no  im- 
portant or  characteristic  feature  has  been  omitted. 
We  ought  now  to  be  able  to  stand  back,  as  it  were, 
from  the  picture,  and  form  some  kind  of  general 
impression  from  it.  Shall  we  agree  with  Gibbon, 
who  considered  that  under  good  emperors,  such 
as  the  series  beginning  with  Nerva  at  the  close  o^ 
our  period,  "  the  human  race  "  was  more  happy 
and  prosperous  than  at  any  other  epoch  in  the 
world's  history  ?  The  idea  will  hardly  meet  with 
a  defender  at  the  present  day.  For  who  are  "  the 
human  race  "  whose  condition  was  so  enviable  ? 
The  small  coterie  of  millionaires,  who  wallowed  in 
self-indulgence,  and  drained  the  life  blood  of  the 
empire  ?  Or  the  mass  of  poor  Italians,  of  heavily 
taxed  provincials,  of  miserable  slaves,  who  do  not 
indeed  fill  a  large  space  on  the  page  of  history, 


ANCIENT  AND  MODERN.  276 

but  who  still  had  the  right  to  be  reckoned  among 
human  beings  ?  Was  their  lot  so  happy  or  so 
prosperous  ?  And  can  even  the  intellectual  volup- 
tuary, such  as  Gibbon  doubtless  had  in  his  mind, 
excite  our  envy,  surrounded  as  he  was  by  crowds 
of  slaves  and  dependants,  and  by  every  means  of 
gratifying  alike  the  highest  and  lowest  pleasures  ? 
Surely  not.  We  may  grant,  probably  we  should 
grant,  that  the  Roman  understood  the  art  of 
living  better  than  we  understand  it ;  that  he 
knew  better  than  we  how  to  make  the  most  of  all 
the  pleasures  under  the  sun,  from  the  noblest  art 
to  the  vilest  indulgences  :  we  still  feel  that  our 
civilisation  is  the  higher  of  the  two,  and  that  we 
would  not,  if  we  could,  exchange  our  restless 
moral  consciousness,  our  troubled  political  activity, 
our  busy  competitive  industry,  for  the  unabashed 
hedonism,  the  selfish  indifference,  the  wasteful 
indolence  of  the  Roman  of  the  early  empire. 
With  all  its  brilliancy,  that  civilisation  lacked  the 
vital  spark ;  it  was  soulless,  faithless,  and  essen- 
tially unprogressive.  Rome  had  outlived  her 
ideals  ;  her  patriotism  and  her  religion  had  alike 
become  obsolete,  and  the  renovating  principle  was 
not  to  be  found  within  her  own  pale.     It  is  only 


276  SOCIAL  LIFE  IN  ROME. 

indistinctly  that  we  can  trace,  in  the  first  century, 
the  growing  influence  of  that  contact  between  the 
religious  consciousness  of  the  East  and  the  intel- 
lectual activity  of  the  West,  which  was  destined  to 
determine  the  character  of  mediaeval  and  modern 
civilisation. 


THE  END. 


HISTORY    AND    BIOGRAPHY. 


THE    DAWN   OF    HISTORY.    An    Introduction    to    Pre-Historic 
Study.    Edited  by  C.  F.  KEARY.    12mo,  $1.25. 

This  work  treats  successively  of  the  earliest  traces  of  man  in  the 
remains  discovered  in  caves  or  elsewhere  in  different  parts  of  Europe ; 
of  language,  its  growth,  and  the  story  it  tells  of  the  pre-historic  users 
of  it ;  of  the  races  of  mankind,  early  social  life,  the  religions,  mythol- 
ogies, and  folk-tales  of  mankind,  and  of  the  history  of  writing. 

NATION.— "The  book  may  be  heartily  recommended  as  probably  the  most 
satisfactory  summary  of  the  subject  that  there  Is." 

BOSTON  SAT.  EVE.  GAZETTE.— "A  fascinating  manual,  without  a  vestige 
of  the  dullness  usually  charged  against  scientific  works.  In  its  way,  the  work  Is 
a  model  of  what  a  popular  scientific  work  should  be." 

THE  ORIGIN  OF  NATIONS.    By  Professor  CEORGE  RAWLIN- 
SON,  IYI.A.    12 mo,  with  maps,  $1.00. 

The  first  part  of  this  book,  Early  Civilizations,  discusses  the  an- 
tiquity of  civilization  in  Egypt  and  the  other  early  nations  of  the  Easb. 
The  second  part,  Ethnic  Affinities  in  the  Ancient  World,  is  an  examin- 
ation of  the  ethnology  of  Genesis,  showing  its  accordance  with  the 
latest  results  of  modern  ethnographical  science. 

CONGREGATIONALIST.— "A  work  of  genuine  scholarly  excellence,  and  a 
useful  offset  to  a  great  deal  of  the  superficial  current  literature  on  such  subjects." 

MANUAL   OF    MYTHOLOGY.    For  the  Use  of  Schools,  Art  Stu- 
dents,  and   General   Readers.     Founded  on  the  Works  of 
Petiscus,  Preller,  and  Welcker.    By  ALEXANDER  S.  MUR- 
RAY, Department  of  Greek  and  Roman  Antiquities,  British 
Museum.    With   45   Plates  on  tinted    paper,   representing 
more  than  90  Mythological  Subjects.    Reprinted  from  the 
Second  Revised  London  Edition.    Crown  8vo,  $2.25. 
THE  CLEVELAND  HERALD.— "It  has  been  acknowledged  the  best  work  on 
the  subject  to  be  found  In  a  concise  form,  and  as  it  embodies  the  results  of  the 
latest  researches  and  discoveries  in  ancient  mythologies,  it  is  superior  for  school 
and  general  purposes  as  a  hand  book  to  any  of  the  so-called  standard  works." 

THE  BOSTON  JOURNAL.—"  Whether  as  a  manual  for  reference,  a  text  book 
for  school  use,  or  for  the  general  reader,  the  book  will  be  found  very  valuable  and 
interesting." 


STANDARD   TEXT  BOOKS. 


THE  REFORMATION.  By  Prof.  GEORGE  P.  FISHER,  D.D., 
Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  History  in  Yale  College.  Crown 
8vo,  S2.50. 

the  christian  union.— "The  book  is  a  remarkable  instance  of  that 
power  of  lucid  condensation  which  its  author  possesses  in  a  high  degree.  •  •  • 
The  quality  of  condensedness  renders  it  worthy  to  be  studied,  not  merely  read ; 
and  it  would  be  excellent  as  a  text-book  in  college.  The  references  are  full  and 
valuable,  and  the  chronological  table  and  list  of  authorities  will  be  appreciated 
by  all  students." 

PROF.  CHARLES  A.  AIKEN,  D.D.,  Princeton  Topological  Seminary.—" Pro- 
fessor Fisher's  History  of  the  Reformation  presents  the  results  of  prolonged, 
extended,  and  exact  study,  with  those  excellent  qualities  of  style  which  are  so 
characteristic  of  him— clearness,  smoothness,  judicial  fairness,  vividness,  felicity 
in  arranging  material,  as  well  as  in  grouping  and  delineating  characters.  It  must 
become  not  only  a  library  favorite,  but  a  popular  manual,  where  such  a  work  is 
required  for  instruction  and  study.  For  such  uses  it  seems  to  me  admirably 
adapted." 


THE  ANCIENT   EMPIRES  OF  THE    EAST.     By    Prof.   A.    H. 
SAYCE,  of  Oxford.    12mo,  $1.50. 

THE  CHRISTIAN  ADVOCATE.— "Here  the  life  and  history  of  the  ancient 
civilizations  have  been  sketched  on  the  authority  of  the  monuments  they  have 
themselves  bequeathed.  The  work  is  indispensable  to  all  who  would  keep  pace 
with  the  latest  movements  of  modern  research." 

THE  S.  S.  TIMES — "  Prof.  Sayce's  history  is  the  best  popular  book  in  its  field. 
It  is  abreast  of  modern  research ;  its  point  of  view  is  broad  and  comprehensive, 
and  its  style  is  such  as  to  commend  it  to  the  wide  public  to  which  it  is  addressed." 

THE  JOURNAL  OF  EDUCATION.— "Mr.  Sayce  is  recognized  as  the  leading 
Assyriologist  of  our  day,  and  has  given  in  this  valuable  book  the  latest 
results  of  the  latest  researches  into  the  mysterious  antiquity  of  the  ancient  Orien- 
tal civilizations.  He  gives  us  information  not  to  be  found  elsewhere,  and  much 
which  lies  dispersed  in  periodicals  of  only  limited  circulation.  It  is  Indispensable 
for  every  student  of  history." 


HISTORICAL  OUTLINE  OF  THE   ENGLISH  CONSTITUTION 
FOR  BEGINNERS.    By  D.  W.  RANNIE.    12mo,  $1.00. 

THE  N.  Y.  SUN.— "As  a  compendium  of  the  cardinal  events  and  accepted 
principles  of  constitutional  history  it  may  be  cordially  recommended  to  those 
who  are  beginning  the  study  of  a  political  system." 

THE  BOSTON  COURIER.— "The  book  is  a  very  valuable  manual  for  young 
people.  The  manner  la  clear  and  simple,  and  the  outlines  are  clear  and  accurate. , 


CHARLES  SGRIBNERS  SONS' 


EPOCHS  OF  HISTORY. 

CHARLES  KENDALL  Adams,  President  of  Cornell  university.— "A  Series 
of  concise  and  carefully  prepared  volumes  on  special  eras  of  history.  Eacli  Is 
devoted  to  a  group  of  events  of  such  Importance  as  to  entitle  it  to  be  regarded  as 
an  epoch.  Each  is  also  complete  in  itself,  and  has  no  especial  connection  with 
the  other  members  of  the  series.  The  works  are  all  written  by  authors  selected 
by  the  editor  on  account  of  some  especial  qualifications  for  a  portrayal  of  the 
period  they  respectively  describe.  The  volumes  form  an  excellent  collection, 
especially  adapted  to  the  wants  of  a  general  reader." 

NOAH  PORTER,  President  of  rale  College.—"  The  '  Epochs  of  History '  seem 
to  me  to  have  been  prepared  with  knowledge  and  artistic  skill  to  meet  the  wants 
of  a  large  number  of  readers.  To  the  young  they  furnish  an  outline  or  compen- 
dium which  may  serve  as  an  introduction  to  more  extended  study.  To  those 
who  are  older  they  present  a  convenient  sketch  of  the  heads  of  the  knowledge 
which  they  have  already  acquired.  The  outlines  are  by  no  means  destitute  of 
spirit,  and  may  be  used  with  great  profit  for  family  reading,  and  in  select  classes 
or  reading  clubs." 

BISHOP  JOHN  F.  HURST,  Ex-President  of  Drew  Theological  Seminary.— 
"  It  appears  to  me  that  the  idea  of  Morris  in  his  Epochs  is  strictly  in  harmony 
with  the  philosophy  of  history— namely,  that  great  movements  should  be  treated 
not  according  to  narrow  geographical  and  national  limits  and  distinction,  but 
universally,  according  to  their  place  In  the  general  life  of  the  world.  The  histor- 
ical Maps  and  the  copious  Indices  are  welcome  additions  to  the  volumes." 

THE  NATION.—"  The  volumes  contain  the  ripe  results  of  the  studies  of  men 
who  are  authorities  in  their  respective  fields." 


EPOCHS  OF  ANCIENT  HISTORY.  A  series  of  books  narrating 
the  History  of  Greece  and  Rome,  and  of  their  relations  to 
other  countries  at  successive  epochs.  Edited  by  Rev.  G.  VY. 
COX,  and  CHARLES  SANKEY,  M.A.  Eleven  volumes, 
16mo,  with  41  Maps  and  Plans.  Sold  separately.  Price  per 
vol.,  $1.00.  The  set,  Roxburgh  style,  gilt  top,  in  box,  $11.00. 

TROT— ITS  LEGEND,  HISTORY,  AND  LITERATURE.   By  S.  G.  W.  BENJAMIN. 

THE  GREEKS  AND  THE  PERSIANS.    By  G.  W.  Cox. 

THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE.    By  G.  W.  Cox. 

THE  SPARTAN  AND  THEBAN  SUPREMACIES.    By  Charles  Sankey. 

THE  MACEDONIAN  EMPD3E.    By  A.  M.  Curteis. 

EARLY  ROME.    By  W.  Lhne. 

ROME  AND  CARTHAGE.    The  Punic  Wars.    By  R.  Boswokth  Smith. 

THE  GRACCHI,  MARIUS  AND  SULLA.    By  A.  H.  Beesley. 

THE  ROMAN  TRTCMVERATES.    By  Charles  Meriyat.K. 

THE  EARLY  EMPIRE.    By  W.  Wolfe  Capes. 

THE  AGE  OF  THE  ANTONLNES.    By  W.  Wolfe  Capes. 


STANDARD   TEXT  BOOKS. 


EPOCHS  OF  MODERN  HISTORY.  A  series  of  books  narrating 
the  History  of  England  and  Europe  at  successive  epochs 
subsequent  to  the  Christian  era.  Edited  by  EDWARD  E. 
MORRIS.  Seventeen  volumes,  16mo,  with  74  Maps,  Plans, 
and  Tables.  Sold  separately.  Price  per  vol.,  $1.00.  The 
set,  Roxburgh  style,  gilt  top,  in  box,  $17.00. 

THE  BEGINNING  OF  THE  MIDDLE  AGES.    By  K.  W.  Church. 

THE  NORMANS  IN  EUROPE.    By  A.  H.  Johnson. 

THE  CRUSADES.    By  G.  W.  Cox,  M.A. 

THE  EARLY  PLANTAGENETS.    By  Wm.  Stubbs. 

EDWARD  HL    By  W.  Wabbubton. 

THE  HOUSES  OF  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.    By  James  Gaibdneb. 

THE  ERA  OF  THE  PROTESTANT  REVOLUTION.  By  Fbederic  Seebohm. 
With  Notes  on  Books  in  English,  relating  to  the  Reformation.  By  Prof. 
Geobge  P.  Fishes,  D.D. 

THE  EARLY  TUDORS.    Henry  VH. ;  Henry  VHL    By  C.  E.  Mobebly. 

THE  AGE  OF  ELIZABETH.    By  M.  Cbeighton. 

THE  THIRTY  YEARS'  WAR,  1618-1648.    By  Samuel  Rawson  Gardiner. 

THE  PURITAN  REVOLUTION.     By  Samuel  Rawson  Gabdineb. 

THE  FALL  OF  THE  STUARTS.    By  Edward  Hale. 

THE  AGE  OF  ANNE    By  Edward  E.  Mokbis. 

THE  EARLY  HANOVERIANS.    By  Edwabd  E.  Mobbis. 

FREDERICK  THE  GREAT.    By  F.  W.  Longman. 

THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION  AND  FIRST  EMPIRE.  By  William  O'Connor 
Mobbis.    With  Appendix  by  Andrew  D.  White,  LL.D. 

THE  EPOCH  OF  REFORM,  1830-1850.    By  Justin  McCarthy. 

THE  HISTORY  OF  ROME,  from  the  Earliest  Time  to  the  Period 
of  Its  Decline.  By  Dr.  THEODOR  MOMMSEN.  Translated, 
with  the  author's  sanction  and  additions,  by  W.  P.  Dickson, 
D.D.,  LL.D.  With  an  Introduction  by  Dr.  Leonhard  Schmitz. 
Reprinted  from  the  Revised  London  Edition.  Fotir  volumes 
crown  8vo,  gilt  top.    Price  per  set,  $8.00. 

LONDON  TIMES.— "A  work  of  the  very  highest  merit;  its  learning  is  exact 
and  profound ;  its  narrative  full  of  genius  and  skill ;  its  descriptions  of  men  ere 
admirably  vivid.  We  wish  to  place  on  record  our  opinion  that  Dr.  Xommsen's  is 
by  far  the  best  history  of  the  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Commonwealth." 

DR.  SCHMITZ.— "  Since  the  days  of  Niebuhr,  no  work  on  Roman  History  has 
appeared  that  combines  so  much  to  attract,  instruct,  and  charm  the  reader.  Its 
style— a  rare  quality  in  a  German  author— is  vigorous,  spirited,  and  animated 
Professor  Mommsen's  work  can  stand  a  comparison  with  the  noblest  productions 
of  modern  history." 


CHARLES   SCIilBNER'S   SONS' 


AX  ADDITION  TO   TIIEODOR  M0MMSEJT8  HISTORY  OF  ROME. 

THE  PROVINCES  OF  THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE.  From  Caesar  to 
Diocletian.  By  THEODOR  MOMMSEN.  Translated  with 
the  author's  sanction  and  additions,  by  William  P.  Dickson, 
D.D.,  LL.D.  With  ten  maps,  by  Professor  Kiepert.  2  vols., 
8vo,  $6.00. 

Contents:  The  Northern  Frontier  of  Italy— Spain—The  Gallic 
Provinces — Roman  Germany  and  the  Free  Germans — Britain — The 
Danubian  Lands  and  the  Wars  on  the  Danube — Greek  Europe — Asia 
Minor— The  Euphrates  Frontier  and  the  Parthians— Syria  and  the 
Land  of  the  Nabateeans — Judea  and  the  Jews — Egypt — The  African 
Provinces. 

N.  Y.  SUN. — "  Professor  Mommsen's  work  goes  farther  than  any  other  ex- 
tant, or  now  looked  for,  to  provide  us  with  a  key  to  the  mediaeval  history  of  the 
Mediterranean  world." 

PROF.  W.  A.  PACKARD,  in  Presbyterian  Review.— "  The  author  draws  the 
wonderfully  rich  and  varied  picture  of  the  conquest  and  administration  of  that 
great  circle  of  peoples  and  lands  which  formed  the  empire  of  Rome  outside  of 
Italy,  their  agriculture,  trade,  and  manufactures,  their  artistic  and  scientific  life, 
through  all  degrees  of  civilization,  with  such  detail  and  completeness  as  could 
have  come  from  no  other  hand  than  that  of  this  great  master  of  historical  research 
in  all  its  departments,  guided  by  that  gift  of  historical  Imagination,  for  which  he 
is  equally  eminent" 


THE   HISTORY  OF  GREECE.    By  Prof.  Dr.  ERNST  CURTIUS. 

Translated  by  Adolphus  William  Ward,  M.  A.,  Fellow  of  St. 
Peter's  College,  Cambridge,  Prof,  of  History  in  Owen's  Col- 
lege, Manchester.  Uniform  with  Mommsen's  History  of 
Rome.  Five  volumes,  crown  8vo,  gilt  top.  Price  per  set, 
$10.00. 

LONDON  ATHEN/EUM.— "Professor  Curtius'  eminent  scholarship  i3  a  suffi- 
cient guarantee  for  the  trustworthiness  of  his  history,  while  tho  skill  with  which 
ha  groups  his  facts,  and  his  effective  mode  of  narrating  them,  combine  to  render 
it  no  less  readable  than  sound.  Prof.  Curtius  everywhere  maintains  the  true 
dignity  and  impartiality  of  history,  and  it  is  evident  his  sympathies  are  on  the 
>.Je  of  justice,  humanity,  and  progress." 

LONDON  SPECTATOR.— "We  cannot  express  our  opinion  of  Dr.  Curtius' 
book  better  than  by  saying  that  it  may  be  fitly  ranked  with  Theodor  Mommsen's 
great  work." 

N.  Y.  DAILY  TRIBUNE. -"As  an  introduction  to  the  study  of  Grecian  history, 
no  previous  work  is  comparable  to  the  present  for  vivacity  and  picturesque 
beauty,  while  in  sound  learning  and  accuracy  of  statement  it  Is  not  inferior  to 
the  elaborate  productions  which  enrich  the  literature  of  the  age." 


TRANSLATIONS  OF  PLATO. 


THE  DIALOGUES  OF  PLATO.  Translated  into  English,  with 
Analysis  and  Introductions.  By  B.  JOWETT,  M.A.,  Master 
of  Balliol  College,  Oxford,  and  Regius  Professor  of  Creek. 
A  new  and  cheaper  edition.  Four  vols.,  crown  8vo,  per  set, 
S8.00. 

THE  NEW  YORK  TRIBUNE.— "The  present  work  of  Professor  Jowettwill  be 
welcomed  with  profound  Interest,  as  the  only  adequate  endeavor  to  transport  the 
most  precious  monument  of  Grecian  thought  among  the  familiar  treasures  of 
English  literature.  The  noble  reputation  of  Professor  Jowett,  both  as  a  thinker 
and  a  scholar,  It  may  be  premised,  however,  Is  a  valid  guaranty  for  the  excellence 
of  his  performance.  He  Is  known  as  one  of  the  most  hard-working  students  of 
the  English  universities,  in  the  departments  of  philology  and  criticism,  whose 
exemplary  diligence  is  fully  equalled  by  his  singular  acuteness  of  penetration, 
bis  clear  and  temperate  judgment,  and  his  rare  and  absolute  fidelity  to  the  inter* 
ests  of  truth." 

THE  NEW  YORK  EVENING  POST.— "One  of  the  most  splendid  and  valuable 
gifts  to  literature  that  has  for  a  long  time  been  offered.  The  work  has  all  the 
freedom  and  strength  of  an  original,  and  the  grace  of  language  is  only  equalled 
by  the  profound  scholarship  displayed  in  the  translation. " 

THE  CLEVELAND  HERALD.— "Prof.  Jowett's  knowledge  of  Greek  language 
and  literature  and  of  the  spirit  of  the  ancient  Greek  life  and  philosophy  is  pro- 
found. The  rendering  is  accurate,  the  style  easy  and  natural,  and  the  very  full 
explanatory  and  critical  introductions  to  each  section  are  of  invaluable  assistance. 
In  the  reproduction  of  this  masterly  translation  the  publishers  have  performed  a 
valuable  service  to  American  letters." 

PLATO'S  BEST  THOUGHTS.  As  compiled  from  Professor 
Jowett's  Translation  of  the  Dialogues  of  Plato.  By  Rev.  C. 
H.  A.  BULKLEY.    A  new  edition,  crown  8vo,  $1,50. 

FROM  THE  PREFACE. — "The  present  volume  presents  in  the  most  accessible 
form  the  wide  range  of  subjects  upon  which  Plato  dwells,  and  exhibits  him  in  all 
his  varied  aspects  of  philosopher,  moralist,  socialist,  logician,  rhetorician, 
scientist,  and  critic.  The  extracts  here  given  have  been  carefully  collected,  so  as 
to  be  unique  and  integral  in  thought.  While  those  who  are  desirous  to  peruse  the 
complete  translation  of  Prof.  Jowett  will  doubtless  do  this,  yet  there  are  many 
others  to  whom  this  volume  will  be  welcome  as  giving  the  finest  wheat  of  Plato  In 
a  ready,  readable  form.  Even  the  reader  of  the  fuller  work  may  be  glad  to  have  a 
compendium  of  Platonic  thought  so  available  for  cursory  perusal  and  casual  quo- 
tation." 

THE  EVANGELIST.—"  This  volume  makes  the  best  things  in  Plato  aecesslblf 
and  available,  and  Its  index  gives  It  the  character  of  a  dictionary." 


STANDARD    TEXT  HOOKS. 


SOCRATES.  A  Translation  of  the  Apology,  Crito  and  parts  of 
the  Phaedo  of  Plato,  containing  the  Defence  of  Socrates  at 
his  Trial,  his  Conversation  in  Prison,  with  his  Thoughts  on 
the  Future  Life,  and  an  Account  of  his  Death.  With  an  In- 
troduction by  Professor  W.  W.  Goodwin,  of  Harvard  Col- 
lege.   12mo,  cloth,  S1.00;  paper,  50  cents. 

TALKS  WITH  SOCRATES  ABOUT  LIFE.  Translations  from 
the  Corgias  and  the  Republic  of  Plato.  12mo,  cloth,  $  1.00; 
paper,  50  cents. 

A  DAY  IN  ATHENS  WITH  SOCRATES.  Translations  from  the 
Protagoras  and  the  Republic  of  Plato.  Being  conversations 
between  Socrates  and  other  Creeks  on  Virtue  and  Justice. 
12mo   cloth,  $1.00;  paper,  50  cents. 

The  first  of  these  volumes  sketches  the  personal  character  and 
moral  position  of  Socrates,  together  with  Plato's  own  speculations ;  the 
second  volume  presents  in  forcible  and  elegant  English  the  practical 
philosophy  and  pure  morality  of  the  Gorgiaa  and  Republic,  accom- 
panied by  an  able  introduction  and  explanatory  notes  ;  while  the  last 
volume  has  for  its  object  to  give  a  vivid  picture  not  so  much  of  Plato's 
Philosophy  as  of  the  age  in  which  he  lived,  and  to  enable  the  reader  to 
enter  into  the  every-day  scenes  of  Athenian  life,  and  to  become,  as  it 
were,  an  actual  participator  in  the  action. 

PROFESSOR  GOODWIN.— "I  have  advised  the  translator  to  publish  these 
versions  of  Plato,  in  the  belief  that  they  will  be  welcomed  by  many  to  whom  both 
Plato  and  Socrates  have  hitherto  been  merely  venerated  names ;  especially  by 
those  whose  Interest  In  knowing  what  Plato  and  Socrates  really  taught  has  been 
doubly  checked  by  ignorance  of  Greek  and  by  the  formidable  aspect  of  Plato's 
complete  works,  even  In  an  English  translation." 

W.  D.  HOWELLS,  In  Harper's  Monthly.— "That  •  Day  in  Athens  with  Socra- 
tes,' those  '  Talks  with  Socrates  about  Life,'  and  tbat  first  volume  containing  the 
Apology,  and  the  Phaedo,  all  strike  a  note  so  familiar,  deal  with  questions  so  liv- 
ing, that  they  seem  of  present  concern  and  modern  fact.  Eminent  Scholars,  men 
of  much  Latin  and  more  Greek,  attest  the  skill  and  truth  with  which  the  versions 
are  made ;  we  can  confidently  speak  of  their  English  grace  and  clearness.  They 
seem  a  '  model  of  style,'  because  they  are  without  manner  and  perfectly  simple." 

THE  NEW  YORK  EVENING  POST.— "We  do  not  remember  any  translation 
of  a  Greek  author  which  is  a  better  specimen  of  idiomatic  English  than  this,  or  a 
more  faithful  rendering  of  tbe  real  spirit  of  the  original  into  English  as  good  and 
as  simple  as  the  Greek.  Such  a  translation  renders  the  reading  of  the  original 
well  nigh  superfluous." 


A    HISTORY    OF 

ROMAN    LITERATURE, 

From  the  Earliest  Period  to  the  Deatk  of  Marcus  Aurelius. 
By    CHARLES    THOMAS    CRUTTWELL,   M.A., 

Fellow  and  Tutor  of  Merton  College,  Oxford. 


One  Vol.,  erown  8vo,  with  Chronological  Tableo,  et}  ,  Cloth,  $fiuStf 


"Mr,  Cruttwell  has  done  a  real  service  to  all  students  of  the  Latin 
language  and  literature.  .  .  .  Full  of  good  scholarship  and  good 
criticism." — London  Athenaum. 

'*  Nothing  at  all  equal  to  it  has  hitherto  been  published  in  England."' 
—British  Quarterly  Review. 

"Mr.  Cruttwell  has  produced  that  rare  thing — a  manual  which  con- 
tains all  necessary  facts  and  references  to  all  indispensable  authorities, 
and  which,  far  from  being  repulsively  dry,  is  rather  attractive,  and  apt  to 
make  the  student  go  on  reading  longer  than  he  originally  intended." 
— London  Saturday  Review. 

"Cruttwell's  History  of  Roman  Literature  is  a  book  to  delight  in, 
a  book  to  take  up  and  read  with  the  same  zest  with  which  we  read  a 
thoroughly  good  essay  upon  a  modern  author ;  only  it  is  at  least  very 
rarely  that  any  one  person  treats  a  considerable  number  of  modern  authors 
with  the  skill  with  which  Cruttwell  has  treated  every  prominent  author 
that  Rome  produced." — Literary  World. 

"  Mr.  Cruttwell  has  given  us  a  genuine  history  of  Roman  literature, 
not  merely  a  descriptive  list  of  authors  and  their  productions,  but  a  well 
elaborated  portrayal  of  the  successive  stages  in  the  intellectual  develop- 
ment of  the  Romans,  and  the  various  forms  of  expression  which  these  took 
in  literature." — Nation. 

"  The  whole  work  has  those  solid  qualities  of  scholarship  which  will 
commend  it  to  students." — Hartford  Conrant. 

"  No  student's  library  is  complete  without  this  handy  volume. — N.  E. 
fournal  of  Education. 

"  A  volume  of  sterling  value  for  the  student  or  for  the  mature  man 
of  letters. — Phila.  Bulletin. 

"  The  volume  is  a  rich  mine  for  the  student  of  Latin  history  or 
literature. " — Boston  Transcript. 


%*  The  above  book  for  sale  by  all  booksellers,  or  will  be  sent,  prepaid,  upon 
recti/ 1  of  price,  by 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS,  Publishers, 

743  and  745  Broadway,  New  York. 


\ 


<u 


5^&- 


N 


This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below 
?,'N  10   1935  I  I 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 

This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


Htm  i  »mr 

mmz 

JAN  2  81985 


3  1158  00804  8927 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


87    o 


